- WP Engine filed a third amended complaint against Automattic and Matt Mullenweg
- It alleges plans to demand royalties from ten other hosting firms
- The complaint claims Stripe was pressured to end its contract with WP Engine
- Automattic says the latest filing repeats arguments already dismissed by the court
The long running dispute between WP Engine and Automattic has taken another turn, with fresh allegations filed in court that intensify an already high stakes battle over trademarks, revenue sharing and influence within the WordPress ecosystem.
WP Engine has submitted a third amended complaint against Automattic and its CEO Matt Mullenweg, adding newly unsealed details that it says strengthen its case.
At the heart of the conflict is a demand made by Mullenweg that WP Engine pay 8% of its monthly gross revenue as a royalty for using the WordPress brand. WP Engine argues that the request amounted to an abuse of power and has challenged it in court.
Automattic, for its part, insists the latest filing adds nothing meaningful and claims the court has already dismissed key elements of WP Engine’s argument.
Royalty demands widen beyond WP Engine
According to the updated complaint, Mullenweg did not intend to single out WP Engine alone. The company alleges that plans were in motion to approach at least ten other hosting providers with similar royalty demands tied to their use of the WordPress trademark.
WP Engine also claims that one major hosting group, Newfold Digital, is already paying Automattic for trademark use. The identities of other companies referenced in the filing remain redacted.
The dispute revolves around a fundamental question within the open source world. Who gets to define fair contribution? Mullenweg previously argued that WP Engine benefits significantly from the WordPress name while failing to give back proportionally to the open source project.
WP Engine rejects that framing, maintaining that it contributes in meaningful ways and that Automattic’s demands overstep the boundaries of trademark governance.
This tension reflects a broader debate in open source communities about commercial use, stewardship and the balance between profit and participation.
Allegations of pressure on Stripe
One of the more striking claims in the latest filing involves Stripe. WP Engine alleges that after the lawsuit was initiated, Mullenweg attempted to pressure Stripe into terminating its payment processing relationship with WP Engine.
If proven, that claim could add weight to WP Engine’s accusations of intentional interference and unfair competition. The company argues that such actions go beyond a trademark dispute and enter the territory of commercial retaliation.
Automattic has dismissed the renewed allegations as recycled complaints. A spokesperson stated that the narrative has been circulating for over a year and that courts have already rejected many of the central claims.
The company remains confident that the remaining allegations will not prevail.
Legal back and forth continues
This is not the first time WP Engine has expanded its complaint. A first amendment introduced antitrust allegations, while a second amendment cited newly uncovered facts during discovery. The third amendment now includes information that had previously been sealed at the request of the defendants.
WP Engine maintains that a recent motion to dismiss ruling allowed the majority of its claims to proceed. These include allegations of intentional interference, unfair competition and defamation.
In November 2025, WP Engine also moved to dismiss counterclaims brought by Automattic, Matt Mullenweg, the WordPress Foundation and WooCommerce.
The case now stands as one of the most closely watched disputes in the WordPress world, given the influence of Automattic and the scale of WP Engine’s hosting business. Beyond the courtroom, the outcome could shape how trademark rights are enforced within open source ecosystems and how commercial players engage with foundational platforms.
A defining moment for WordPress governance
The legal battle underscores the complex relationship between commercial hosting providers and the custodians of open source software.
WordPress powers a significant share of the web, and companies like WP Engine have built thriving businesses around it. At the same time, Automattic and Mullenweg play central roles in guiding the platform’s direction and protecting its brand.
The question now is whether the courts will view the royalty demand as a legitimate exercise of trademark control or as overreach.
For businesses operating within open source frameworks, the answer could set a precedent that reverberates well beyond this single dispute.
Follow TechBSB For More Updates
