Reference: This article is based on the original INC publication, “Mullenweg’s open-source empire dominates the web. But his attack on competitor WP Engine may be putting it all at risk.“
Introduction: The Underestimated Web Titan
WordPress, an open-source platform quietly powering nearly half of the internet’s websites, remains an unsung hero of the digital age. Behind its meteoric rise stands Matt Mullenweg, a controversial figure who founded WordPress in 2003 and built it into a vast ecosystem underpinned by his private company, Automattic. Despite its open-source ethos, recent events, including a public spat with competitor WP Engine, have cast doubt on WordPress’s governance and long-term stability. These developments expose a paradox at the heart of WordPress: a platform championed for its freedom but subject to the tightly controlled leadership of one individual.
WordPress: The Foundation of the Modern Web
WordPress’s influence is staggering. The platform powers everything from personal blogs to major corporate websites, with an estimated $600 billion economy surrounding it. Its open-source foundation allows developers to freely build and adapt websites using plugins, themes, and other tools, fostering an innovative ecosystem. Yet, this open-source freedom belies the underlying reality—Matt Mullenweg’s extensive control over the platform.
Automattic, Mullenweg’s company, capitalized on WordPress’s open-source reputation to monetize the ecosystem. Offering paid hosting and tools, Automattic is the largest player in the WordPress landscape. While Mullenweg describes open source as “profoundly capitalistic,” his dual roles as the platform’s leader and Automattic’s CEO blur the lines between community stewardship and corporate interest.
The WP Engine Debacle: A Crisis in Open-Source Governance
In late 2024, tensions between Mullenweg and WP Engine, WordPress’s second-largest provider, erupted into public conflict. Mullenweg accused WP Engine of failing to contribute sufficiently to WordPress’s development while profiting from its ecosystem. Frustrated by months of stalled negotiations, Mullenweg unilaterally blocked WP Engine from accessing key WordPress resources, including updates and plugins, disrupting over 1.5 million websites.
WP Engine retaliated with a lawsuit, accusing Mullenweg of extortion and abuse of power. The conflict escalated as Automattic replaced WP Engine’s popular Advanced Custom Fields plugin with its own version, drawing sharp criticism from the WordPress community. The debacle revealed an uncomfortable truth: WordPress, celebrated for its open-source ethos, is deeply vulnerable to the whims of its “benevolent dictator for life.”
Governance Questions: Is WordPress Truly Open?
Mullenweg’s control extends beyond Automattic. Through the WordPress Foundation—a nonprofit ostensibly overseeing the platform—he retains effective ownership of WordPress.org, the hub for software updates, plugins, and themes. While the Foundation claims independence, its governance structure is opaque, with Mullenweg as chairman and two largely anonymous board members.
This centralization of power has led to calls for reform within the WordPress community. Critics argue that Mullenweg’s actions undermine the very principles of open-source software, with some suggesting a fork—splitting WordPress into a new platform under different leadership. However, forking a platform as vast as WordPress is no small feat, and Mullenweg’s dominance remains unchallenged for now.
The Open-Source Dilemma: Maker vs. Taker
The clash with WP Engine highlights a recurring issue in open-source projects: the “maker-taker problem.” While open-source platforms rely on contributions from users, there is no mechanism to compel businesses profiting from these platforms to contribute. Mullenweg’s attempts to enforce contributions from WP Engine, including a demand for 8% of its gross revenue, contradict the voluntary spirit of open source. His heavy-handed tactics have alienated parts of the community, with some developers abandoning WordPress altogether.
A Reputation in Turmoil
Mullenweg’s actions have tarnished his reputation as a visionary leader in open-source software. Once admired for championing accessibility and innovation, he now faces criticism for authoritarian tendencies. Prominent voices in the tech world, including Ruby on Rails creator David Heinemeier Hansson, have publicly denounced Mullenweg’s behavior as “unhinged” and a breach of open-source norms.
Adding to the backlash, the California district court issued an injunction requiring Automattic to restore WP Engine’s access to WordPress resources, signaling judicial concern over Mullenweg’s conduct. Despite this, Mullenweg remains defiant, framing his actions as necessary to uphold the integrity of WordPress.
The Future of WordPress: Stability or Uncertainty?
The fallout from the WP Engine conflict raises existential questions about WordPress’s future. Can a platform that powers nearly half the web sustain itself under centralized leadership that wields unchecked power? Or will the community demand greater transparency and distributed governance?
Mullenweg, for his part, remains confident. He likens the controversy to a temporary storm, asserting that adversity will strengthen WordPress in the long run. However, with competitors like WebFlow gaining traction and calls for reform growing louder, the path ahead is far from certain.
Conclusion: A Cautionary Tale for Open Source
WordPress’s story is both an inspiring testament to the power of open-source innovation and a cautionary tale about the risks of centralized control. Mullenweg’s stewardship has enabled WordPress to become a cornerstone of the web, but his recent actions underscore the fragility of its governance model. For businesses and developers reliant on WordPress, the question is no longer just about the platform’s capabilities—it’s about its stability and the integrity of its leadership.
