Why WordPress founder Matt Mullenweg has gone ‘nuclear’ against tech investing giant Silver Lake
Automattic founder, Matt Mullenweg
Source: Automattic
Matt Mullenweg, who turned 40 in January, has now spent more than half his life working on WordPress. He’s never had such an insane two weeks.
WordPress, best known as a leading content management system, has hundreds of millions of sites currently using its templates, tools and plugins. But the WordPress universe is a complicated mishmash of open-source products, nonprofits, for-profit companies, trademarks and licenses.
The typically quiet but extremely important part of the internet — WordPress powers roughly 40% of all websites — has suddenly emerged as a major source of tech industry drama, threatening to upend an ecosystem that’s long been viewed, from the outside at least, as collegial, thanks to its longevity and the various fun-loving camps and learning sessions it hosts every year.
While WordPress’ technology is open source, meaning anyone can install it and use it for free, Mullenweg is also founder and CEO of Automattic, a venture-backed startup valued at $7.5 billion, as of 2021. WordPress.com is Automattic’s central businesses, and individuals and companies pay anywhere from $4 a month to over $25,000 a year for services like ad products, security, customer support and inventory management.
The saga that burst into public view in September featured the normally mild-mannered Mullenweg as its central character in a battle with WP Engine, one of the leading providers of WordPress hosting. Silicon Valley private equity firm Silver Lake bought a majority stake in WP Engine in 2018, investing $250 million and obtaining three board seats.
“I’ve been doing WordPress for 21 years, I have good relationships with every other company in the world,” Mullenweg said in an interview this week with CNBC.
WP Engine’s offense, according to Mullenweg and a cease-and-desist letter his attorneys sent to the company on Sept. 23, revolves around years of trademark violations and WP Engine’s claim that it’s bringing “WordPress to the masses.”
“We at Automattic have been attempting to make a licensing deal with them for a very long time, and all they have done is string us along,” Mullenweg wrote in a Sept. 26 post on his personal website, ma.tt. “Finally, I drew a line in the sand, which they have now leapt over.”
Since then, the matter has escalated on an almost daily basis. WordPress took the drastic step of banning WP Engine from using the WordPress resources necessary to serve its customers, which preceded a lawsuit filed on Wednesday by WP Engine against Mullenweg and Automattic. Mullenweg then put out another post, calling WP Engine’s suit “meritless,” and announcing that he’d hired Neal Katyal, former U.S. acting solicitor general, for legal defense.
Tomasz Tunguz, a venture capitalist and founder of Theory Ventures, says the conflict speaks to the perpetual challenge of open-source software.
“What are the legitimate ways of monetizing open source and does the commercial entity created by the authors — how much control should they have with the commercialization efforts?” Tunguz said. In this case, “hundreds of millions in revenue is at stake between the two,” he added.
‘Silver Lake doesn’t give a dang’
In Mullenweg’s telling of the brouhaha, the battle has been years in the making. He’s been actively trying to strike a deal since January and finally got fed up, he said.
But to the outside world, it all felt very sudden. Mullenweg first referenced the matter in public on Sept. 17, in a blog post ahead of WordCamp, the largest annual gathering in the U.S. of WordPress users. The four-day event took place in Portland, Oregon, beginning on Sept. 17.
In the post, Mullenweg criticized WP Engine for not contributing enough back to the WordPress ecosystem. He said that Automattic contributed 3,786 hours per week to WordPress.org, (“not even counting me!”) compared to 47 hours for WP Engine.
For businesses and developers considering who they want to support, Mullenweg had this message: “Silver Lake doesn’t give a dang about your Open Source ideals. It just wants a return on capital.”
A Silver Lake spokesperson said WP Engine was handling all inquiries. A WP Engine representative referred to the company’s complaint against Automattic and Mullenweg, filed on Oct. 2. The spokesperson highlighted the introduction of the complaint.
“This is a case about abuse of power, extortion, and greed,” the filing begins. “The misconduct at issue here is all the more shocking because it occurred in an unexpected place — the WordPress open source software community built on promises of the freedom to build, run, change, and redistribute without barriers or constraints, for all. Those promises were not kept, and that community was betrayed, by the wrongful acts of a few—[Matt Mullenweg and Automattic]—to the detriment of the many, including WPE.”
On Sept. 20, three days after Mullenweg’s initial post, the WordPress founder showed he wouldn’t be backing down.
In his keynote, at an event that attracted an estimated 1,500 WordPress fanatics, Mullenweg warned the audience upfront that it “might be one of my spiciest WordCamp presentations ever.” After reading out his prior blog post, Mullenweg took swipes at Silver Lake, even naming a partner at the firm, Lee Wittlinger, as the man behind WP Engine, comparing him to a “schoolyard bully.”
Prior to taking questions, Mullenweg said of WP Engine’s presence at WordCamp, “they’re not going to be at future ones, I don’t think.”
He wasn’t done.
The next day, in a post titled, “WP Engine is not WordPress,” Mullenweg wrote that even his mother didn’t know the difference, and he said WP Engine is “profiting off of the confusion” and “needs a trademark license to continue their business.”
His mom wasn’t the only one confused.
Bob Perkowitz, president of environmental nonprofit ecoAmerica, told CNBC that he’s known Mullenweg for 16 years and is even an investor in Automattic. For a number of his organizational and personal websites, Perkowitz said he’s long been a WP Engine customer. Tuning in remotely, he heard Mullenweg’s WordCamp presentation.
“I always thought that was part of WordPress,” Perkowitz told CNBC in an interview, referring to WP Engine. “They’re misleading, and they don’t contribute to the community.”
Perkowitz said he’s having his website administrator migrate all of the websites to different hosting companies.
Following Mullenweg’s presentation, WP Engine sent Automattic’s legal chief a cease-and-desist letter on Sept. 23, due to what the company called Mullenweg’s self-described “scorched earth nuclear approach.” The letter said Mullenweg had demanded a payout of a “very large sum of money” before his WordCamp keynote, and WP Engine didn’t pay up.
The letter said Mullenweg’s “false, misleading, and disparaging statements are legally actionable.”
Two days later, Mullenweg wrote on the WordPress.org site that WP Engine had been banned, meaning it “no longer has free access to WordPress.org’s resources.” Mullenweg encouraged WP Engine’s thousands of customers to contact the company “and ask them to fix it.”
WordPress then temporarily unblocked WP Engine and gave it until Oct. 1 to agree to terms of a licensing agreement, which Mullenweg made public. The crux of the deal is that WP Engine would agree to a royalty fee of 8% of monthly revenue to Automattic or commit 8% of revenue “in the form of salaries of WP Engine employees” working on WordPress features for WordPress.org.
No deal was made. The ban went into effect Oct. 1.
To the universe of WP Engine customers, Mullenweg’s actions were harsh and clumsy. Mullenweg says that what his critics don’t understand is how long he’s been trying to come to a deal.
“They’ve been delaying forever,” Mullenweg told CNBC. He decided, “I’m going to finally start talking about the evil stuff you’re doing unless you talk to me,” he said.
Fighting back
Far from negotiating, WP Engine on Wednesday filed its explosive lawsuit against Mullenweg and Automattic.
WP Engine accuses Mullenweg of slander and libel due to his public comments and says the WordPress founder has numerous conflicts of interest in how he runs the community and his company, give the open-source nature of the technology.
“Over the last two weeks, Defendants have been carrying out a scheme to ban WPE from the WordPress community unless it agreed to pay tens of millions of dollars to Automattic for a purported trademark license that WPE does not even need,” the lawsuit says. “Defendants’ plan, which came without warning, gave WPE less than 48 hours to either agree to pay them off or face the consequences of being banned and publicly smeared.”
Following WP Engine’s demands for a jury trial in its 61-page lawsuit, Mullenweg fired back, describing the complaint as “baseless” and “flawed, start to finish.”
On his personal website, Mullenweg acknowledged that the ordeal was causing a big internal clash at his company.
“It became clear a good chunk of my Automattic colleagues disagreed with me and our actions,” Mullenweg wrote.
He says he made the decision to offer buyout packages for anyone who resigned before early afternoon Thursday, offering $30,000 or six months of salary, whichever is higher. Anyone who took the deal wouldn’t be eligible to “boomerang,” a term for getting rehired.
Mullenweg said that 159 people, or 8.4% of the workforce, took the offer while the 91.6% who opted to stay turned down a collective $126 million.
Mullenweg concluded by saying, “now I feel much lighter.”
“I’m grateful and thankful for all the people who took the offer, and even more excited to work with those who turned down $126M to stay,” Mullenweg wrote. “As the kids say, LFG!”
Mullenweg may be openly enthusiastic and grateful for the employees he still has on board, but the WordPress community is a mess. Many WP Engine customers are suffering, and Automattic is gearing up for a legal fight against a private equity firm with over $100 billion in assets.
WATCH: An open-source future
Formula One F1 – United States Grand Prix – Circuit of the Americas, Austin, Texas, U.S. – October 23, 2022 Tim Cook waves the chequered flag to the race winner Red Bull’s Max Verstappen
Mike Segar | Reuters
Apple had two major launches last month. They couldn’t have been more different.
First, Apple revealed some of the artificial intelligence advancements it had been working on in the past year when it released developer versions of its operating systems to muted applause at its annual developer’s conference, WWDC. Then, at the end of the month, Apple hit the red carpet as its first true blockbuster movie, “F1,” debuted to over $155 million — and glowing reviews — in its first weekend.
While “F1” was a victory lap for Apple, highlighting the strength of its long-term outlook, the growth of its services business and its ability to tap into culture, Wall Street’s reaction to the company’s AI announcements at WWDC suggest there’s some trouble underneath the hood.
“F1” showed Apple at its best — in particular, its ability to invest in new, long-term projects. When Apple TV+ launched in 2019, it had only a handful of original shows and one movie, a film festival darling called “Hala” that didn’t even share its box office revenue.
Despite Apple TV+ being written off as a costly side-project, Apple stuck with its plan over the years, expanding its staff and operation in Culver City, California. That allowed the company to build up Hollywood connections, especially for TV shows, and build an entertainment track record. Now, an Apple Original can lead the box office on a summer weekend, the prime season for blockbuster films.
The success of “F1” also highlights Apple’s significant marketing machine and ability to get big-name talent to appear with its leadership. Apple pulled out all the stops to market the movie, including using its Wallet app to send a push notification with a discount for tickets to the film. To promote “F1,” Cook appeared with movie star Brad Pitt at an Apple store in New York and posted a video with actual F1 racer Lewis Hamilton, who was one of the film’s producers.
(L-R) Brad Pitt, Lewis Hamilton, Tim Cook, and Damson Idris attend the World Premiere of “F1: The Movie” in Times Square on June 16, 2025 in New York City.
Jamie Mccarthy | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images
Although Apple services chief Eddy Cue said in a recent interview that Apple needs the its film business to be profitable to “continue to do great things,” “F1” isn’t just about the bottom line for the company.
Apple’s Hollywood productions are perhaps the most prominent face of the company’s services business, a profit engine that has been an investor favorite since the iPhone maker started highlighting the division in 2016.
Films will only ever be a small fraction of the services unit, which also includes payments, iCloud subscriptions, magazine bundles, Apple Music, game bundles, warranties, fees related to digital payments and ad sales. Plus, even the biggest box office smashes would be small on Apple’s scale — the company does over $1 billion in sales on average every day.
But movies are the only services component that can get celebrities like Pitt or George Clooney to appear next to an Apple logo — and the success of “F1” means that Apple could do more big popcorn films in the future.
“Nothing breeds success or inspires future investment like a current success,” said Comscore senior media analyst Paul Dergarabedian.
But if “F1” is a sign that Apple’s services business is in full throttle, the company’s AI struggles are a “check engine” light that won’t turn off.
Replacing Siri’s engine
At WWDC last month, Wall Street was eager to hear about the company’s plans for Apple Intelligence, its suite of AI features that it first revealed in 2024. Apple Intelligence, which is a key tenet of the company’s hardware products, had a rollout marred by delays and underwhelming features.
Apple spent most of WWDC going over smaller machine learning features, but did not reveal what investors and consumers increasingly want: A sophisticated Siri that can converse fluidly and get stuff done, like making a restaurant reservation. In the age of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude and Google’s Gemini, the expectation of AI assistants among consumers is growing beyond “Siri, how’s the weather?”
The company had previewed a significantly improved Siri in the summer of 2024, but earlier this year, those features were delayed to sometime in 2026. At WWDC, Apple didn’t offer any updates about the improved Siri beyond that the company was “continuing its work to deliver” the features in the “coming year.” Some observers reduced their expectations for Apple’s AI after the conference.
“Current expectations for Apple Intelligence to kickstart a super upgrade cycle are too high, in our view,” wrote Jefferies analysts this week.
Siri should be an example of how Apple’s ability to improve products and projects over the long-term makes it tough to compete with.
It beat nearly every other voice assistant to market when it first debuted on iPhones in 2011. Fourteen years later, Siri remains essentially the same one-off, rigid, question-and-answer system that struggles with open-ended questions and dates, even after the invention in recent years of sophisticated voice bots based on generative AI technology that can hold a conversation.
Apple’s strongest rivals, including Android parent Google, have done way more to integrate sophisticated AI assistants into their devices than Apple has. And Google doesn’t have the same reflex against collecting data and cloud processing as privacy-obsessed Apple.
Some analysts have said they believe Apple has a few years before the company’s lack of competitive AI features will start to show up in device sales, given the company’s large installed base and high customer loyalty. But Apple can’t get lapped before it re-enters the race, and its former design guru Jony Ive is now working on new hardware with OpenAI, ramping up the pressure in Cupertino.
“The three-year problem, which is within an investment time frame, is that Android is racing ahead,” Needham senior internet analyst Laura Martin said on CNBC this week.
Apple’s services success with projects like “F1” is an example of what the company can do when it sets clear goals in public and then executes them over extended time-frames.
Its AI strategy could use a similar long-term plan, as customers and investors wonder when Apple will fully embrace the technology that has captivated Silicon Valley.
Wall Street’s anxiety over Apple’s AI struggles was evident this week after Bloomberg reported that Apple was considering replacing Siri’s engine with Anthropic or OpenAI’s technology, as opposed to its own foundation models.
The move, if it were to happen, would contradict one of Apple’s most important strategies in the Cook era: Apple wants to own its core technologies, like the touchscreen, processor, modem and maps software, not buy them from suppliers.
Using external technology would be an admission that Apple Foundation Models aren’t good enough yet for what the company wants to do with Siri.
“They’ve fallen farther and farther behind, and they need to supercharge their generative AI efforts” Martin said. “They can’t do that internally.”
Apple might even pay billions for the use of Anthropic’s AI software, according to the Bloomberg report. If Apple were to pay for AI, it would be a reversal from current services deals, like the search deal with Alphabet where the Cupertino company gets paid $20 billion per year to push iPhone traffic to Google Search.
The company didn’t confirm the report and declined comment, but Wall Street welcomed the report and Apple shares rose.
In the world of AI in Silicon Valley, signing bonuses for the kinds of engineers that can develop new models can range up to $100 million, according to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.
“I can’t see Apple doing that,” Martin said.
Earlier this week, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg sent a memo bragging about hiring 11 AI experts from companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google’s DeepMind. That came after Zuckerberg hired Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang to lead a new AI division as part of a $14.3 billion deal.
Meta’s not the only company to spend hundreds of millions on AI celebrities to get them in the building. Google spent big to hire away the founders of Character.AI, Microsoft got its AI leader by striking a deal with Inflection and Amazon hired the executive team of Adept to bulk up its AI roster.
Apple, on the other hand, hasn’t announced any big AI hires in recent years. While Cook rubs shoulders with Pitt, the actual race may be passing Apple by.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks alongside U.S. President Donald Trump to reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025 in Washington, DC.
Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who bombarded President Donald Trump‘s signature spending bill for weeks, on Friday made his first comments since the legislation passed.
Musk backed a post on X by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who said the bill’s budget “explodes the deficit” and continues a pattern of “short-term politicking over long-term sustainability.”
The House of Representatives narrowly passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on Thursday, sending it to Trump to sign into law.
Paul and Musk have been vocal opponents of Trump’s tax and spending bill, and repeatedly called out the potential for the spending package to increase the national debt.
On Monday, Musk called it the “DEBT SLAVERY bill.”
The independent Congressional Budget Office has said the bill could add $3.4 trillion to the $36.2 trillion of U.S. debt over the next decade. The White House has labeled the agency as “partisan” and continuously refuted the CBO’s estimates.
The bill includes trillions of dollars in tax cuts, increased spending for immigration enforcement and large cuts to funding for Medicaid and other programs.
It also cuts tax credits and support for solar and wind energy and electric vehicles, a particularly sore spot for Musk, who has several companies that benefit from the programs.
“I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!” Trump wrote in a social media post in early June as the pair traded insults and threats.
Shares of Tesla plummeted as the feud intensified, with the company losing $152 billion in market cap on June 5 and putting the company below $1 trillion in value. The stock has largely rebounded since, but is still below where it was trading before the ruckus with Trump.
Tesla one-month stock chart.
— CNBC’s Kevin Breuninger and Erin Doherty contributed to this article.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike