WP Engine has updated their claims against Matt Mullenweg and Automattic based on documents received during the discovery phase of the trial. In these documents WP Engine found that Matt and Automattic had a list of 10 hosting companies they planned to go after for trademark licensing fees and that Matt tried to make Stripe drop WP Engine as a customer. There is more information in the article by Roger Montti.

The European Commission plans to end the widespread annoyance of cookie pop-ups by letting users manage cookie preferences directly through their browsers. Websites would have to respect these settings for at least six months, and trivial uses of cookies, like counting visits, wouldn’t require banners. Initially, prompts will be simplified to a single yes/no click, with more advanced browser-level solutions coming later. The proposals aim to modernize EU digital rules, simplify online experiences, and give users real control over their data. The changes still need approval from the European Parliament and EU member states.

About three weeks ago Automattic filed counter claims against WP Engine. WP Engine has asked the court to dismiss all of the counter claims. The WP Engine reasoning seems good. The hearing is scheduled for February 5th.

404 Media summarizes the trademark issue between Matt Mullenweg / Automattic and Kevin Geary / Automatic.CSS. Automattic has asked that the Automatic.CSS product name be changed.

The counter suit against WP Engine claims that SEO evidence shows the misuse of trademarks. Roger Montti, an SEO expert does his own analysis and finds that the evidence doesn’t seem to support the claims.

In an escalation of the legal dispute with WP Engine, the WordPress Foundation and WooCommerce joined in a counter suit to bolster the trademark infringement claims.

WP Engine has updated its legal complaint against Automattic and Matt. They provided much more detail to explain the WordPress ecosystem and to show why they think Automattic and Matt were engaging in wrongful action and so harmed WP Engine. Roger Montti has summarize the type of new information provided.

My comments from reading the amended filing: It is very long and there are a number of redacted sections, which are information received in discovery. While we don’t know the exact details of the redacted sections, from context it appears that they relate to internal discussions within Automattic to monetize WordPress org if companies didn’t pay for trademark usage. That is my speculation based on the context.

Roger Montti shares his analysis on the recent court rulings of WP Engine v Automattic and Matt.

Matt reports that the court has dropped a number of the claims.