• WormFood@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    the same organisation makes both, they just release a subset of their work as the open source version of WordPress. it’s a pretty standard business model for this kind of software

    • ToRA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      That is incorrect. Automattic donates some work to the open-source project, but they are in no way the same thing.

      • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Man this is like saying proton isn’t made by Valve… Matt Mullenweg was one of the cocreators of Wordpress and went on to start Automattic which is a pun on his name. He’s literally got (or at least had) the title of lead developer in the Worldpress Foundation and he’s CEO of Automattic.

        • ToRA@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I didn’t say it’s not “made by”, they clearly contribute plenty, just like many others. The issue is that a non-profit entity should not be used as an advertising platform giving preferential treatment to a single for-profit business.

          The WordPress Foundation clearly states that you can’t use the name WordPress in your domain or business name nor use the logo for your business (https://wordpressfoundation.org/trademark-policy/) yet that is what Automattic does and Automattic or WordPress.com is not the same entity as the WordPress Foundation or WordPress.org. That is illegal and unethical.

            • ToRA@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not when you are a non-profit. You cannot run a non-profit in a way that only provides special benefits to a person or group and exclude others.

      • blazeknave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Donates some work? They open source the platform. You can pay for hosting at .com… honestly asking, what are you even mad about?

          • ToRA@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            WordPress is a free and open-source software provided by a non-profit organization. WordPress.com is a for-profit business and a completely separate entity. What Automattic is doing is illegal and unethical.

        • ToRA@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because WordPress.org is a non-profit that is clearly being treated as a puppet for the WordPress.com for-profit business. It’s not just “they also open-source their software”. They are separate entities. It’s literally illegal and obviously unethical.

          • blazeknave@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            What laws are being broken? You use adverbs like “clearly” and “obviously” to make your point but they’re not helpful. It’s not obvious. What is unethical?

            • ToRA@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Nonprofit organizations are not allowed to divert undue benefits to any person or organization.

              It is obvious and clear if you know the bare minimum of non-profit organizations.

              Do you actually not understand the basics of non-profit organizations? If so, I’m not sure why you’re butting into a conversation about the subject. Otherwise you must be arguing in bad faith.

              • blazeknave@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                No, not in bad faith. Look at the comment vote counts if you think I’m being provocative about a minority opinion.

                Mozilla Corp is a subsidiary of the non profit. They put money in it. Wtf are you talking about?

                I think “undue” is subjective and you’re inserting your opinions.

                • ToRA@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Comment votes are meaningless considering no one can tell if the people voting are even qualified to weigh in. Do you think the votes on r/the_donald mattered? That is the appeal to popularity fallacy

                  You bring up Mozilla as an example but make no effort to explain how it’s similar.

                  No one is allowed to use the WordPress trademark or logo for their business, except for one company. That for-profit company is not owned or run by the non-profit and the only connection is the owner/founder/CEO. Please provide some logic or reasoning why that is not an undue benefit.

                  • blazeknave@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Dude stop. You’re calling me out for bad faith but look what you’re doing. Everything you’re writing in direct response to something I’ve shared, you’re misdirecting from the intent.