Wordpress CEO after WP Engine's head

Gee how strange, I never expected that. Cough Cough....
Matthew Mullenweg has this all to himself, and no one else.

---

Of course, as a company, you are not going to donate multiple employees in terms of donating hours towards contributing to WordPress, when a single person in the form of Matthew, on a whim, can block the entire access to wordpress.org from customers, staff and anything related to a company if the best man does not like. With dire consequences.

 

This is a poorly executed spin and public relations effort. It's *far* from a legal win. The case remains alive, but has been narrowed.

Automattic dodged only 3-ish big bullets (extortion, trademark, and antitrust - until WPEngine makes an amended complaint within 21 days), but serious claims (defamation, CFAA hijacking, UCL, unjust enrichment, and interference) remain.

The original filing had 11 counts and the amended filing has 20. Here's the scorecard:


1. Intentional interference with contract — Survives.
2. Intentional interference with prospective economic relations — Survives.
3. CFAA §1030(a)(7) — Dismissed w/ leave.
4. Attempted extortion — Dismissed w/o leave.
5. UCL (unlawful/unfair) — Survives.
6. Promissory estoppel — Partial (specific directory promises actionable).
7. DJ—non‑infringement — Remains live (not addressed on this motion).
8. DJ—non‑dilution — Remains live (not addressed on this motion).
9. Libel — Survives; anti‑SLAPP denied.
10. Trade libel — Survives; anti‑SLAPP denied.
11. Slander — Survives; anti‑SLAPP denied.
12. Sherman §2 monopolization — Dismissed w/ leave.
13. Sherman §2 attempted monopolization — Dismissed w/ leave.
14. Sherman §1 tying — Dismissed w/ leave.
15. Cartwright Act tying — Dismissed w/ leave.
16. DJ—trademark misuse — Dismissed (no standalone claim; may be affirmative defense).
17. Lanham §43(a) unfair competition — Remains live; Automattic agency challenge denied.
18. Lanham §43(a) false advertising — Remains live; Automattic agency challenge denied.
19. CFAA §1030(a)(5) — Survives.
20. Unjust enrichment — Survives.

Edit 1: Forgot to include trademark misuse in my top-level summary, which was dismissed as a **standalone** claim, but it can be raised later as a **defense**.
Edit 2: Numbered the 20 counts.

 

I just called the local authorities for a welfare check for Matt.