WPEngine, Inc. vs. Automattic– Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Preliminary Injunction Outcome

  • Court granted a broad preliminary injunction against Automattic/WordPress leadership, which commenters note is a high bar.
  • Ordered: restore WPEngine’s access to wordpress.org (plugins, infrastructure, Slack), return control of the ACF plugin, remove the anti‑WPEngine login checkbox, and remove the public WPEngine customer‑tracking site/file.
  • No bond required; the judge rejected Automattic’s request for a large bond meant to cover two years of costs.

Court’s View of the Case

  • Multiple commenters say the order reads as if the judge largely accepts WPEngine’s narrative.
  • The court found a likelihood of success on tortious interference, which commenters view as unusually strong.
  • The judge characterizes Automattic’s defenses as mostly unsupported or self‑inflicted.

Role of Public Statements and HN Threads

  • The injunction explicitly cites Hacker News comments and social media posts; people note that leadership “talked themselves into” a worse position.
  • Many recall repeatedly urging them to stop posting about the dispute; others are glad the posts made the alleged bad acts easy to prove.

Legal Principles Discussed

  • Main themes: tortious interference with contracts, unfair competition, and promissory estoppel (public promises about wordpress.org being “free for everyone” relied on by WPEngine).
  • Several stress that this is not about forcing open‑source developers to fix bugs or provide warranties; it’s about targeting a specific company for exclusion and harm while continuing to serve others.
  • Others explain that a preliminary injunction simply restores the status quo while the case proceeds, not a final precedent.

Impact on Users and Public Interest

  • The order emphasizes harm to end‑users: broken automatic updates, impractical manual workarounds, and operational costs imposed on WPEngine and its customers.
  • Commenters highlight that using a “security” pretext while privately describing the move as leverage undercuts Automattic’s position.

WordPress Governance and Trust

  • Many are disturbed to learn from filings that wordpress.org is effectively controlled as a personal asset, despite years of “community asset/foundation” messaging.
  • Volunteers and ecosystem companies now feel exposed to arbitrary exclusion, and some predict lasting damage to the foundation’s credibility and Automattic’s reputation.

Sentiment on Leadership and Future

  • Strongly negative sentiment toward Automattic’s leadership style (described as ego‑driven, erratic, and vindictive).
  • Some long‑time WordPress developers, despite disliking WPEngine as a product, still see the injunction as the “only just outcome.”
  • Repeated calls for a governance overhaul (real foundation board, separation from the for‑profit company), but skepticism that current leadership will cede control.