We have no entitlement to WordPress

The first thing to get out of the way, before descending into feudalism, is that we have no entitlement to WordPress. Three forces may combine to give people a sense of entitlement, but the truth is something different.

The three forces

The three forces are the GPL, longevity, and community:

• Force 1 – the GPL: Anyone who gets their hands on a copy of WordPress can do whatever they want with it as long as they comply with the terms of the GPL (and don’t do anything that, properly construed, infringes the WordPress trademarks). They can turn features off and on, host it as a SaaS offering, fork it, etc. That’s the beauty of the GPL.
• Force 2 – longevity: When people have been using WordPress for so long, and with so many free benefits, it’s natural perhaps to develop a feeling of ‘WordPress will always be there when I want it’. For theme and plugin developers and WordPress hosts, that includes access to WordPress.org, despite the fact that – until very recently – many of us (myself included) had not appreciated that one person owns and funds WordPress.org.
• Force 3 – community: The third and perhaps even more significant component of this is that, given that WordPress is truly the fruits of so many individual labours (most notably, but not only, the tireless work of core developers from around the world) and that it floats within such an enormous ecosystem, the sense of community can be akin to being part of a wave that’s carrying everyone along in unison.

Entitlement

These combined forces – the GPL freedoms, the longevity of WordPress, and the enormous community on which it surfs – can morph into a sense of entitlement. I am not using the word ‘entitlement’ in a negative or pejorative sense. I simply mean that people may think they have a right to it, including a right to developer access to WordPress.org and server-to-server access to WordPress.org. To my mind, it’s completely understandable for people to have acquired some sense of entitlement (not in a bad way, just in a ‘I have every right to this like everyone else’ kind of way).

There is no entitlement

However, the reality is that, for 99 point something % of the population, ongoing use of WordPress is a privilege, to which we have no entitlement. In practical terms, the GPL freedoms make no difference to that. Why? Because the vast majority of the global population is simply not in a position to maintain the WordPress core, to fork WordPress into something else, to maintain the themes and plugins on which they rely, to identify security risks and patch them, or to replicate the functionality of WordPress.org on which we’ve all come to rely.

And so, the vast vast vast majority of us remained privileged. Not entitled. We are akin to serfs in a feudal system. Those who till the land may contribute to its upkeep, but most of them are serfs nevertheless.

The resemblance to feudalism¹

I mean no offence in using the analogy, but the governance of WordPress can be considered feudal in nature. It began at the hands of someone with a benevolent vision who, through toil and sacrifice, created something that, in a very real sense, would change the world, and over time and through that toil and sacrifice, he would become king and assemble a close group of lords (in this sense, the king was self-made through conquest, rather than a product of ascendence, but let’s ignore that for now). To maintain that power, he needed support. Skilled developers and others came to his aid, and the fruits of that support is free access by anyone in the world to the software created by the king and those who have rallied around him to support his vision.

At the end of the day, though, nearly all of us but the king and his lords are serfs, and we have no real power over the thing on which we have come to depend: WordPress. We are allowed to live on the land of WordPress, but it is not truly ‘ours’, we have no contractual right to its upkeep, and we face ongoing risk of the privilege being withdrawn or of being taxed for ongoing receipt. There’s zero complaint or criticism here. It’s just fact.

From feudalism to democracy

If we cast our minds back in history we remember that, over time and as a result of various factors, feudalism would come to be replaced with a more democratic way of life. The factors prompting change included:

• Growth of trade and commerce: As trade expanded during the late Middle Ages, urban centres grew, and a new class of wealthy merchants and artisans emerged. This middle class (the bourgeoisie) gained economic power and began challenging the dominance of the feudal lords.
• Decline of feudal land ownership: The feudal system was built on a land-based economy, with nobles controlling lands and serfs working them. The Black Death and agricultural changes reduced the population, leading to a labor shortage that weakened the manorial system. Serfs gained more bargaining power, and in some cases, even abandoned feudal obligations altogether, moving to cities where wealth was not tied to land.
• Magna Carta and early legal reforms: Documents like the Magna Carta (1215) limited the power of kings and granted certain rights to nobles, sowing the seeds for broader legal and political frameworks that emphasised individual rights and rule of law.
• The Renaissance: Beginning in the 14th century, the Renaissance sparked a renewed interest in classical Greek and Roman ideas, including those about governance and citizenship. Humanism promoted the idea that individuals had value and should participate in public life.
• The Enlightenment: In the 17th and 18th centuries, Enlightenment thinkers such as John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Montesquieu, and Voltaire began promoting ideas like liberty, equality, and popular sovereignty. Locke’s social contract theory argued that legitimate governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, challenging the idea of divine-right monarchy and autocratic rule.
• War: Wars and revolutions occurred.
• Communications: The printing press and communication networks came into being.
• End of feudal loyalties: As centralised monarchies and nation-states emerged, loyalty shifted from local feudal lords to the nation-state. This created an environment where broader political participation (through parliaments and assemblies) became possible, setting the stage for modern democracy.

Some similarities

Returning now to the MM/Automattic-WPEngine controversy, there are some interesting similarities:

• Trade and commerce involving WordPress has soared. It has changed people’s economic fortunes, others have developed careers out of it, and entire industries have sprung up to support it.
• At the same time, and despite its huge uptake (40+% of websites on the Internet), numerous competitors chomp at WordPress’ heals, giving the serfs far greater choice which, if exercised in ways involving a departure from WordPress, would result in a decline of the feudally-governed territory.
• War has broken out between MM/Automattic and WP Engine. It is not the first such war, but it is the most serious to date and, if steps are not taken to quell it, things could get quite bloody (metaphorically speaking).
• As a result of that war, people are asking for clearer rules, advance notice, no surprises, limits on expulsion, and community buy-in. Given the communication channels at our fingertips, these ideas are circulating quickly, and far and wide. What might happen? A Magna Carta of sorts springs to mind.
• The storm is sparking a renaissance of sorts, in that people are coming to appreciate the importance of participation in the public life of WordPress, while also standing up for what they believe to be right or wrong. Obviously that is a good thing.

Will we see enlightenment?

The question that arises, then, is whether some kind of WordPress-related enlightenment is on the horizon, one that involves:

• more distributed governance arrangements or advisory input;
• a greater willingness on the part of some of the larger players to contribute more;
• an agreed set of rules relating to the likes of community contribution; and
• a legally accurate and balanced policy on trademark usage for significant commercial entities playing in the WordPress sandpit and on which the community is given an opportunity to comment (including more clarity around nominative fair use).

Such enlightenment could even include agreement between the current warring parties to mediate their differences, in the interests not only of their respective businesses but, just as importantly, the wider WordPress ecosystem on which they both rely for their survival. That would take honesty, humility, and maturity on both sides. Gaslighting would need to cease, the needs and interests of the community would need to be respected, and extreme positions would need to be dropped (and yes, we can see extreme positions on both sides). It’s easy for parties to a relationship to fight. Recognising the need for repair and taking steps to repair is harder.

Is there any chance for enlightenment? Who knows. Your guess is as good as mine. But if the answer is no, the current war will continue at great cost to both sides, many may revolt (including by leaving for more peaceful places or forking which, in my view, is in no one’s interests), loyalties will erode, and a reduction in territory may well occur. If that happens, the greatest irony will be that the very thing the current war sought to achieve as articulated at WCUS, namely, ‘survival and thriving of the commons’, may stand to be irreparably damaged by it.

Footnotes