WP Engine had their day in courtroom, but it surely didn’t go completely of their favor, as Choose Araceli Martínez-Olguín dominated the request for a preliminary injunction was too obscure. Nonetheless, the decide stated they had been “inclined to grant some kind of injunction.”
“That’s How You Set A Ransom”
The lawyer for plaintiff provided new particulars about what occurred behind the scenes on the day that Matt Mullenweg went “nuclear” on WP Engine at WordCamp USA. She first defined that Mullenweg’s demand for trademark license was a sham. Then confirmed how Mullenweg did not implement his trademark declare for fifteen years.
Among the many new particulars was that Mullenweg’s demand for $32 million {dollars} was communicated in a one-page letter and that the settlement was for a seven 12 months interval that routinely renews “basically perpetually.” She then revealed new particulars of how Mullenweg selected the $32 million {dollars}, explaining that it was simply “a quantity” that Mullenweg felt WP Engine was capable of pay.
The purpose of this a part of the plaintiff’s argument was to point out that the royalty fee that Mullenweg was asking for was not based mostly on any worth of the mark however relatively the speed was a determine that Mullenweg felt he was capable of squeeze out of WP Engine, saying that the speed was “set in an extortionate method.”
WP Engine’s lawyer provided this narrative of occasions:
“We all know that defendants had no proper to supply that, quote unquote, service as a result of it’s a pretext. It’s a sham. …You take a look at the document. We see that for 15 years, WP Engine was making nominative honest use of the WordPress mark as your complete group did for 15 years with out a lot as a shoulder faucet. ‘Excuse me.’ ‘Right here’s an e mail.’ ‘Right here’s a textual content.’ ‘Right here’s a stop and desist letter.’ Nothing.
Nothing in any respect, till the morning of September twentieth after we obtain this one web page weird trademark license settlement. That’s not how trademark homeowners function. That’s not the way you shield and implement your mark. You don’t wait 15 years after which drop a requirement for thirty two million {dollars} on the recipient.
We additionally know from the value set, …this one web page license listed a worth of eight % of WP Engines gross revenues, which occurs to quantity to thirty two million {dollars}. And it set that worth for a seven 12 months interval to routinely renew basically perpetually.
And when requested, how did you set that worth? Mr. Mullenweg, defendant Matthew Mullenweg, acknowledged, “it’s what I believed they might pay. We did an evaluation to determine what the free money circulate was. That’s how we set that quantity.” That’s not the way you calculate a royalty. That’s the way you set a ransom.”
Choose Questioned WP Engine’s Attorneys
There was a degree within the proceedings the place the Choose Araceli Martínez-Olguín requested WP Engine’s attorneys what proper to continued acces did they’ve with out paying any type of license.
WP Engine’s lawyer answered:
“So there’s simply merely no connection there, your Honor, in any respect. The check isn’t: does WP Engine have a proper to be free from a trademark license?”
The lawyer additionally identified that free entry to WordPress.org was the “establishment” for fifteen years, which modified on September twentieth when Mullenweg initiated his dispute with WP Engine.
Automattic’s Protection Tactic
The lawyer for Automattic and Mullenweg argued a number of technical factors as to why the decide shouldn’t grant an injunction. One key level was that WP Engine’s extortion declare, underneath California regulation, fails as a result of California courts don’t acknowledge a personal reason for motion for tried extortion underneath the California Penal Code.
They then level out that the case regulation WP Engine’s lawyer is counting on (Tran v. Winn) issues a distinct authorized idea (duress and rescission) relatively than extortion. They stated that the plaintiff’s authorized principle doesn’t match extortion claims and entails completely different authorized ideas.
Automattic’s lawyer then follows that up by stating that even when WP Engine may use the Tran v. Winn case regulation, the plaintiff’s argument nonetheless fails underneath the opposite case regulation they’re citing to base their claims on (Levitt case). They argue that the plaintiff can not meet the authorized normal for financial extortion as a result of they’re unable to point out that the defendant had no proper to demand fee for the providers in query.
An argument made by Automattic’s lawyer concerning the trademark license demand is that the plaintiffs omit a second choice within the license, which was to offer volunteer hours equal to the fee. Shaw additionally identified that Mullenweg had made a reference to negotiating the phrases the next week, however WP Engine by no means responded to his message.
The lawyer stated:
“…there’s a textual content from Mr. Mullenweg wherein he says, or he makes reference to even negotiating the phrases the next week. They only by no means responded to Mr. Mullenweg’s response.”
What The Choose Mentioned
Choose Araceli Martínez-Olguín had so much to untangle, with maybe the principle factor being that WP Engine’s injunction was too obscure.
The decide gave a sign of what route she was leaning but additionally defined that the request was a “non-starter.”
“Having reviewed the whole lot, I’m inclined to grant some kind of injunction. Right here’s the issue that I’ve together with your proposed injunction, although. It is a nonstarter as a result of it’s exceedingly obscure.”
The decide then inspired the events to work collectively to slim down the preliminary injunction to one thing that isn’t obscure and failing that they might submit “dueling submissions.” There was some backwards and forwards about what date to return to courtroom with, with WP Engine asking for a Friday date and finally agreeing to return on Tuesday, December third.
Response To Preliminary Injunction Listening to
A lawyer dwell running a blog the proceedings on Bluesky wrote up their take on what occurred:
“I knew that WPE was in excellent form when the opening query was “inform me about your one greatest shot” as a result of that’s not usually a query you’d ask in the event you thought nothing had any benefit.
I believed that tortious interference was the perfect shot. I’m fairly certain WordPress’s legal professionals did too.”
And adopted up with:
“I used to be fairly certain that this was leaning towards a grant on the PI. I believe that Automattic was near getting their different, however Mack might have saved issues along with his tech stroll via.”
He provided a great opinion concerning the decide, saying that she seems to acknowledge that among the technical points are exterior of her space of experience and that she expressed a willingness to ask questions to higher perceive.
He provided his opinion concerning the decide and the ultimate end result:
“It’s clear that the Choose isn’t overly technical in her background, however is conscious of that and is keen to pay attention attentively – this is excellent, and never a common federal decide trait.
It will likely be attention-grabbing to see what we get on Monday.
Nearly actually, dueling proposals.”
This abstract of what occurred in courtroom relies on a dwell weblog and a publish on Bluesky by a lawyer of the proceedings over Zoom.
Featured Picture by Shutterstock/Jidvg