Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more ValentineC's comments login

> The correct move would have been to form a for profit subsidiary owned by the foundation to run Wordpress.org since it’s an unrelated business activity.

They formed WordPress Community Services PBC, which now runs the "official community" WordCamps, so sponsors didn't have to restrict their messaging:

https://wordpressfoundation.org/news/2016/introducing-wordpr...


> Wordpress.org is not part of the 501(c)(3). They tried, but the IRS turned them down.

My interpretation of their story [1] is that holding the WordPress trademark wasn't enough for 501(c)(3) status, so they had to do something educational like promoting free software.

They transferred the trademark once they received 501(c)(3) status, and could have transferred the operation of dot org too if they wanted.

I believe the consensus among the moderate community is that Matt continues to hold onto dot org for "control", just like how the Foundation's board mostly comprises Matt's friends, and never had actual external community involvement.

[1] https://wordpress.org/book/2015/11/the-wordpress-foundation/


I am not sure what you are saying. The assignment of the WordPress trademark to the Foundation was on the same day it was licensed back to Automattic and Matt for WordPress (commercial usage) and wordpress.org

Matt tried to put Wordpress.org as a 501(c)(3) but they ran into problems, e.g. it was a lead gen for paid plug-ins that Automattic owned. So Matt has used his and Automattic resources for wordpress.org for a long time. You can read more about this in the WPEngine suit (page 12). [1]

[1] https://wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/10.18.2024-P...


Let's put the trademark transfer and subsequent relicensing part aside, because I think we agree on that.

> Matt tried to put Wordpress.org as a 501(c)(3) but they ran into problems, e.g. it was a lead gen for paid plug-ins that Automattic owned. So Matt has used his and Automattic resources for wordpress.org for a long time. You can read more about this in the WPEngine suit (page 12).

Where in the lawsuit does it mention that "they ran into problems" transferring operation of dot org to the 501(c)(3)? All I see on page 12 is:

> Until recently, Defendants had given the WordPress community the impression that wordpress.org—the repository for the WordPress software and plugins—was owned and controlled by the WordPress Foundation.

Edit: I found it from a link in a different comment:

https://www.pluginvulnerabilities.com/2024/10/28/matt-mullen... (primarily https://x.com/photomatt/status/1840948013360910448)

A more appropriate question perhaps: can a lawyer specialising in US nonprofits corroborate Matt's claim?


There is some more discussion here. [1] I have no reason to doubt him...wordpress.org does support significant commercial activity, and even if it did go through, would likely require much more conflict/recusal issues. Not surprising he decided to pay taxes on an entity that probably runs at a loss anyway!

[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/Wordpress/comments/1g5o4n5/why_is_w...


I'm surprised Apple didn't co-opt charging mousepad tech, like what Logitech uses:

https://www.logitechg.com/en-us/innovation/powerplay.html


Apple engineers probably still have PTSD from trying to get the AirPower mat to work, I doubt they'll touch non-magnetic wireless charging again.


I'm pretty sure it's patented in some way considering Logitech is still the only option for that .

The product is already several years old after all (release date 2017)


Just pay logitech $5/piece to license the patent and then sell them for $200, there is plenty of meat on the bone for everyone involved.

Or bypass the idea of the patent altogether by making their mouse charge wirelessly and then releasing a giant wireless charger that happens to work pretty well as a mouse pad later.


Option 1 only works if Logitech plays ball. They might consider the exclusivity very valuable and be unwilling to license it for anything reasonable.

Option 2 is a great way to land in court. It's one thing to steal IP from a tiny company or individual but Logitech can afford lawyers.


I've actually tried using the AirPods Pro 2 transparency mode at a Coldplay concert where I was gifted a last minute ticket.

> Can airpods tell me how loud a room is?

I don't think so, but my Apple Watch can.

> Which settings should I use for a concert to preserve fidelity? How do they compare to "concert" branded consumer earplugs, like Loop/Etymotic/SoundProtex ?

Transparency mode was fine, but focuses on blocking and reproducing sound through the built-in microphone and speakers.

They will never be as good as "concert" earplugs which reduce volume evenly.



To be fair, Bitwarden clients are mostly GPL and can be forked, and there's Vaultwarden for self-hosting.

We just need to rally together a community that would maintain such a fork.


The iOS client can never be meaningfully forked, ironically due to the GPL. If Bitwarden goes fully hostile that's lost forever.


I don't understand; isn't the repo licensed under GPLv3?

https://github.com/bitwarden/ios?tab=GPL-3.0-1-ov-file

Is proprietary config required to build the IPA file?


I was under the impression that Apple requires apps to be distributed under terms which conflict with the GPLv3, so the copyright holders effectively need to dual-license an app for it to be suitable for the App Store. Uploading your own version of bitwarden/ios would then open you up to a takedown notice from Bitwarden Inc. since they didn't consent to this.

Looking into it again, it seems like the Apple Media Services T&C now has provisions for distributing apps under a "Custom EULA", but it still has weird clauses like the one saying you can't "scrape, copy, or perform measurement, analysis, or monitoring of, any portion of the Content", which their definition of includes apps. (Ridiculous clause since it prohibits so much as looking at an app with Activity Monitor, but whatever.) The GPLv3 has a provision saying users can ignore additional restrictions, but you as an App Store uploader aren't in a position to grant that right, so... the situation still seems legally iffy enough that I'm not sure you could win against Bitwarden if they objected to a fork.


It was "source available", but licensed under their proprietary Bitwarden licence and not GPLv3.


What I mean is the problem is remedied now and was likely not the big deal people thought it was. Sounds like they packaged something into the software forgetting it was under a different license and quickly relicensed it. But this thread is framing it like they burned a bridge.


As another commenter has mentioned, Apple Passwords allows export to simple CSV:

https://support.apple.com/en-us/guide/passwords/mchl35b12625...

What I dislike about Apple Passwords is how tightly coupled everything is.

I just tried to set it up on my Windows 10 machine with a local account, but it requires Windows Hello to be turned on, which can't be done except with a Microsoft account.

Kinda ridiculous of them to force arbitrary restrictions on us.


> Apple Passwords allows export to simple CSV

Not of passkeys, to my knowledge.

> What I dislike about Apple Passwords is how tightly coupled everything is.

That’s definitely also discouraging me as well.


And then we have WordPress, former champion of open source and GPL, with all their soap opera drama.


> It's also quite nice that Bitwarden can store arbitrary information like CCs, secure notes, and how I capitalized the answers to security questions and other account recovery/login information.

+1. I use my password manager (currently 1Password, but I have been looking at self-hosting Bitwarden/Vaultwarden) more for storing credit card information and security questions.

Most built-in password managers don't cut it on that front.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: