Automattic Is Doing Open Source Dirty  ## Metadata - Author: [[hey.com]] - Full Title: Automattic Is Doing Open Source Dirty - Category: #articles - Document Note: --- tags: - #OpenSource - #WordPress - #Ethics Author: [David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH)] Source: [world.hey.com] Reference: [https://world.hey.com/dhh/automattic-is-doing-open-source-dirty-b95cf128] date created: 2024-10-09 15:00 --- # Title: Automattic is Doing Open Source Dirty ## Table of Contents:  - [📝 Summary](#📝-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#📖-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#🗒️-notes) - [📖 References](#📖-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#🗣️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#📰-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#✅-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#🧪-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#📊-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#❓-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#🔮-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#💡-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#🧠-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#📊-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#🌍-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#✅-logical-validity) - [🔍 SEO Evaluation](#🔍-seo-evaluation) - [🎯 Conclusion](#🎯-conclusion) ## 📝 Summary: In this post, David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH) argues that Automattic, the company behind WordPress, is failing to uphold the core values of open source. He criticizes Automattic for monetizing WordPress in ways that compromise the integrity of the project, raising concerns about licensing and contributor rights. The article asserts that Automattic’s business practices are harmful to the open-source community. ## 📖 Main Content: DHH’s main argument revolves around the belief that Automattic is exploiting its dominance in the WordPress ecosystem. He points out that WordPress is licensed under GPL, but Automattic allegedly bends the rules to profit from proprietary plugins and services. DHH highlights several ways Automattic’s practices undermine the open-source ethos, including monopolistic control over WordPress.org and the misuse of contributors' work without fair compensation or acknowledgment. While DHH acknowledges that Automattic contributes to WordPress, he asserts that this contribution does not justify their business model, which conflicts with open-source principles. He advocates for greater transparency and fairness in how companies engage with open-source communities. ### 🗒️ Notes: - **Open Source and GPL**: - WordPress is GPL-licensed, but DHH argues Automattic skirts these rules. - Automattic offers proprietary plugins/services that lock users in, contrary to open-source values. - **Monetization Issues**: - Automattic profits from WordPress in ways that don’t align with the spirit of open-source software. - Proprietary services built on top of WordPress are seen as a conflict of interest. - **Contributor Rights**: - Contributors’ work is used for Automattic’s gain without adequate recognition or compensation. - DHH advocates for fairer practices in how open-source contributors are treated. ## 📖 References: - [Automattic is Doing Open Source Dirty](https://world.hey.com/dhh/automattic-is-doing-open-source-dirty-b95cf128) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase:  1. DHH contends that Automattic's actions exploit WordPress contributors while bending the rules of the GPL license. He criticizes the company for profiting from proprietary add-ons and services that are built on open-source software. 2. The author calls for more fairness and transparency in the relationship between open-source contributors and companies like Automattic. He argues that contributors deserve more recognition and fair compensation for their work, rather than being used to support proprietary business models. ## 📰 Newsletter: 🚨 **Automattic Under Fire for Open Source Practices** 🚨 David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH) has sparked a heated debate in the WordPress community with his critique of Automattic’s business model. In his latest post, DHH accuses Automattic of exploiting the open-source nature of WordPress by profiting from proprietary services, all while using the work of unpaid contributors. With open-source ethics at stake, this controversy brings fresh attention to how WordPress is being monetized. Stay informed and let us know your thoughts on this evolving story in our upcoming community discussion! ## ✅ Action Items: - Reflect on the balance between monetization and the open-source community within WordPress. - Advocate for more equitable compensation and recognition for contributors in future educational materials and advocacy efforts. - Use DHH’s points to reinforce the importance of transparency in business models within the open-source ecosystem. - Explore strategies for balancing profitability and community engagement as you advance toward your OSPO leadership aspirations. ## 🧪 Hypotheses: 1. Automattic’s business model could discourage new contributors from engaging with the WordPress project. 2. The proprietary services offered by Automattic could lead to fragmentation within the WordPress ecosystem. ### 📊 Methodology: - Survey WordPress contributors to understand their motivations and concerns regarding compensation. - Analyze the usage trends of proprietary plugins versus open-source alternatives within the WordPress ecosystem. ### ❓ Questions: 1. How does Automattic balance the need for profitability with maintaining the integrity of the open-source project? 2. What are the long-term effects of proprietary plugins on the open-source ecosystem of WordPress? ### 🔮 Future Research: - Investigate the impact of proprietary software on open-source contributor engagement and retention. - Explore alternative business models that align more closely with open-source values. ### 💡 Implications:  If research shows that Automattic’s practices are discouraging contributor engagement, it could lead to significant changes in how companies approach open-source contributions. This could prompt a broader conversation about fair compensation in open-source communities. ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment: 1. **Visual Learners (Spatial)**: - **Present**: No visual aids in the article. - **Improve**: Add diagrams or flowcharts explaining how open-source licenses work in relation to proprietary services. 2. **Aural Learners (Auditory-Musical)**: - **Present**: None. - **Improve**: Consider an audio version of the article or related podcast links for further engagement. 3. **Verbal Learners (Linguistic)**: - **Present**: The article is rich in descriptive language and persuasive arguments. - **Improve**: Provide additional resources or links for further reading on GPL and open-source licensing. 4. **Physical Learners (Kinesthetic)**: - **Present**: None. - **Improve**: Include interactive examples, such as experimenting with open-source projects and exploring the licensing options hands-on. 5. **Logical Learners (Mathematical)**: - **Present**: Some logical progressions in the argument against Automattic’s practices. - **Improve**: Provide more structured analysis or case studies comparing different business models in open-source. 6. **Social Learners (Interpersonal)**: - **Present**: The article discusses community impact. - **Improve**: Encourage discussions in community forums about Automattic’s role in the WordPress ecosystem. 7. **Solitary Learners (Intrapersonal)**: - **Present**: Offers reflection on the ethics of open-source engagement. - **Improve**: Suggest further reflection prompts on the balance between profitability and open-source values. 8. **Naturalistic Learners**: - **Present**: No references to environmental or nature-based analogies. - **Improve**: Introduce sustainability-related analogies for better engagement with this group. ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment: - **Screen Reader Compatibility**: The article uses basic HTML, which is accessible, but lacks detailed alt text for visual elements. - **Improve**: Include alt-text descriptions for all visual elements and charts (if added). - **Keyboard Navigation**: No interactive elements; hence, fully accessible for keyboard-only navigation. - **Improve**: Ensure future interactive content (if added) is accessible via keyboard navigation. - **Contrast and Readability**: Text readability is good. - **Improve**: Ensure high contrast in color scheme - Document Tags: [[dhh]] [[Matt Mullenweg]] [[open source corporate contribution]] [[ruby]] [[wordpress]] [[wpdrama]] [[wp engine]] - Summary: Automattic demanding 8% of WP Engine's revenues because they're not "giving back enough" to WordPress is a wanton violation of general open source ideals and the specifics of the GPL license. Automattic is completely out of line, and the potential damage to the open source world extends far beyond the WordPress. Don't let the drama or ... - URL: https://world.hey.com/dhh/automattic-is-doing-open-source-dirty-b95cf128 [Automattic demanding 8% of WP Engine's revenues](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/10/05/wordpress-ceo-matt-mullenweg-goes-nuclear-on-silver-lake-wp-engine-.html) because they're not "giving back enough" to WordPress is a wanton violation of general open source ideals and the specifics of [the GPL license](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html). Automattic is completely out of line, and the potential damage to the open source world extends far beyond the WordPress. Don't let [the drama](https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/04/159-employees-are-leaving-automattic-as-ceos-fight-with-wp-engine-escalates/) or its characters distract you from that threat. A key part of why open source has been so successful over the last several decades is the clarity and certainty of its licensing regime. Which allow you to build a business on open source without fear of frivolous claims or surprise shakedowns. The terms of the deal are spelled out in the license agreement, and the common ones, like MIT, BSD, or GPL, have all stood the test of time. The most important part of such a license is usually the fact that the software is offered without any warranty. But some also include provisions that require any modifications to be released as open source as well. None of the major licenses, however, say anything close to "it's free but only until the project owners deem you too successful and then you'll have to pay 8% of your revenues to support the project". That's a completely bonkers and arbitrary standard based in the rule of spite, not law. I don't even have a dog in this fight, only a set of principles. If anything, I'd be naturally inclined to be on Team WordPress. Between creating one of the most widely used open-source programs and powering half the internet, there's every tribal reason to side with Automattic over WP Engine's private-equity owners at Silver Lake. But whatever my feelings about private equity in general or Silver Lake's management of WP Engine in particular, I care far more about the integrity of open source licenses, and that integrity is under direct assault by Automattic's grotesque claim for WP Engine's revenues. It's even more outrageous that Automattic has chosen trademarks as their method to [get their "Al Capone"](https://tech.slashdot.org/story/24/10/04/1925239/matt-mullenweg-wordpressorg-just-belongs-to-me) when up until 2018 they were part owners of WP Engine before selling their stake to Silver Lake! And yet, I can see where this is coming from. [Ruby on Rails](https://rubyonrails.org/), the open-source web framework I created, has been used to create businesses worth hundreds of billions of dollars combined. Some of those businesses express their gratitude and self-interest by supporting the framework with dedicated developers, membership of [The Rails Foundation](https://rubyonrails.org/foundation), or conference sponsorships. But many also do not! And that is absolutely their right, even if it occasionally irks a little. That's the deal. That's open source. I give you [a gift of code](https://world.hey.com/dhh/the-open-source-gift-exchange-2171e0f0), you accept the terms of the license. There cannot be a second set of shadow obligations that might suddenly apply, if you strike it rich using the software. Then the license is meaningless, the clarity all muddled, and certainty lost. Look, Automattic can change their license away from the GPL any time they wish. The new license will only apply to new code, though, and WP Engine, or anyone else, are eligible to fork the project. That's what happened with Redis after Redis Labs dropped their BSD license and went with a commercial source-available alternative. [Valkey](https://valkey.io/) was forked from the last free Redis version, and now that's where anyone interested in an open-source Redis implementation is likely to go. But I suspect Automattic wants to have their cake and eat it too. They went to retain WordPress' shine of open source, but also be able to extract their pound of flesh from any competitor that might appear, whenever they see fit. Screw that., Automattic Is Doing Open Source Dirty, hey.com, 01j9q61zmv8s21f86q3mxya6jy.