free and open source

automattic’s-“nuclear-war”-over-wordpress-access-sparks-potential-class-action

Automattic’s “nuclear war” over WordPress access sparks potential class action

WordPress software, Keller’s complaint explained, “has long been promised to be free and available to everyone forever.” This promise propelled WordPress’ popularity to, by its own estimates, “encompass more than 40 percent of all websites in the world,” his complaint said.

In the 10 years Keller used WPE, he never had any issues accessing the WordPress ecosystem, and he thought WordPress had guaranteed that it would stay that way—especially since WPE’s use of the trademark appeared to be “expressly permitted on the WordPress foundation website.”

But in the past few years, WPE’s business has substantially grown, Keller explained, attracting big customers like Yelp, Thomson Reuters, and Dropbox, which otherwise may have paid WordPress for similar services.

This seemingly frustrated Mullenweg, who accused WPE of abusing the WordPress trademark to charge customers for access to WordPress’ free tools. The founder took the extraordinary step of blocking WPE’s access to software updates and patches, security updates, and plugins last September. And although Automattic eventually allowed WPE three days to mirror certain data to fulfill its contracts with clients, access was permanently blocked after that, forcing WPE customers to waste time and resources finding workarounds or ways to migrate sites to new web platforms after WPE’s mirroring proved faulty.

“Even if Defendants’ trademark case had merit (it likely does not), it does not excuse Defendants’ deliberate and vindictive targeting of Plaintiff and Class’s contracts with WPE,” Keller’s complaint said, calling Automattic’s reneging on its promise to always provide free access “an appalling deception.”

Automattic could harm the entire Internet

Further, Keller alleged that Automattic took steps to “poach” WPE customers.

That effort included sending emails to WPE customers “claiming they could restore access to the website if the WPE customer left WPE” and posting a list calling out all of WPE’s customers. Automattic also allegedly threatened WPE customers, required all WordPress users to tick a checkbox confirming they were unaffiliated with WPE to access resources, and “stole WPE’s most popular plugin and renamed the author to give themselves credit for the product.”

Automattic’s “nuclear war” over WordPress access sparks potential class action Read More »

german-router-maker-is-latest-company-to-inadvertently-clarify-the-lgpl-license

German router maker is latest company to inadvertently clarify the LGPL license

The GNU General Public License (GPL) and its “Lesser” version (LGPL) are widely known and used. Still, every so often, a networking hardware maker has to get sued to make sure everyone knows how it works.

The latest such router company to face legal repercussions is AVM, the Berlin-based maker of the most popular home networking products in Germany. Sebastian Steck, a German software developer, bought an AVM Fritz!Box 4020 (PDF) and, being a certain type, requested the source code that had been used to generate certain versions of the firmware on it.

According to Steck’s complaint (translated to English and provided in PDF by the Software Freedom Conservancy, or SFC), he needed this code to recompile a networking library and add some logging to “determine which programs on the Fritz!Box establish connections to servers on the Internet and which data they send.” But Steck was also concerned about AVM’s adherence to GPL 2.0 and LGPL 2.1 licenses, under which its FRITZ!OS and various libraries were licensed. The SFC states that it provided a grant to Steck to pursue the matter.

AVM provided source code, but it was incomplete, as “the scripts for compilation and installation were missing,” according to Steck’s complaint. This included makefiles and details on environment variables, like “KERNEL_LAYOUT,” necessary for compilation. Steck notified AVM, AVM did not respond, and Steck sought legal assistance, ultimately including the SFC.

Months later, according to the SFC, AVM provided all the relevant source code and scripts, but the suit continued. AVM ultimately paid Steck’s attorney fee. The case proved, once again, that not only are source code requirements real, but the LGPL also demands freedom, despite its “Lesser” name, and that source code needs to be useful in making real changes to firmware—in German courts, at least.

“The favorable result of this lawsuit exemplifies the power of copyleft—granting users the freedom to modify, repair, and secure the software on their own devices,” the SFC said in a press release. “Companies like AVM receive these immense benefits themselves. This lawsuit reminded AVM that downstream users must receive those very same rights under copyleft.”

As noted by the SFC, the case was brought in July 2023, but as is typical with German law, no updates on the case could be provided until after its conclusion. SFC posted its complaint, documents, and the source code ultimately provided by AVM and encouraged the company to publish its own documents since those are not automatically public in Germany.

German router maker is latest company to inadvertently clarify the LGPL license Read More »