Germany Unveils 563 Million Missile Deal As Air Defense Plans Take Shape
Germany’s decision to approve $563 million for the development and procurement of MBDA’s …
07. November 2025
Wordpress Founder Firmly Stands By Claiming Ownership Of Word Automatic
Automattic Inc., the company behind WordPress.com, has claimed ownership of the word “automatic” as part of its intellectual property portfolio. This claim has sparked controversy, with Automatic.CSS, a CSS framework provider for WordPress page builders, facing demands to change its name due to the perceived conflict.
At the heart of this dispute lies Matt Mullenweg, Automattic’s founder and a well-known figure in the tech industry. As part of his personal branding, Mullenweg has adopted two T’s as a nod to himself, often seen in various forms of merchandise and promotional materials. This unique identifier raises questions about trademark law and its application to company names.
Automattic discovered that Automatic.CSS was using the word “automatic” as part of its company name and branding. According to Jim Davis, an intellectual property attorney representing Automattic, the company owns and operates numerous software brands and services, including WordPress.com. Davis wrote in a letter dated October 30: “As you know, our client owns and operates a wide range of software brands and services, including the very popular web building and hosting platform WordPress.com. It is essential that we take steps to protect our clients’ intellectual property rights and prevent any potential conflicts or dilution of their brand identities.”
This assertion raises questions about the complexity of trademark law and its application to company names. Trademark law allows companies to register unique words, phrases, or logos as proprietary marks, but it also recognizes that similar-sounding names can create confusion among consumers.
Automatic.CSS’s creator, Kevin Geary, has argued that his company’s name is not likely to cause confusion with Automattic’s branding. Geary stated in a statement that Automatic.CSS’s website and marketing materials clearly indicate that the company provides a CSS framework for WordPress page builders, rather than implying any direct connection to the word “automatic” as used by Mullenweg.
Despite the potential nuances of trademark law, Automattic’s claim has sparked a wider conversation about the importance of brand protection and intellectual property rights. As companies continue to expand their portfolios of software products and services, they must carefully consider how these assets intersect with existing trademarks and branding strategies.
The dispute highlights the evolving nature of online business and the role that trademarks play in defining a company’s identity. With the rise of digital platforms and social media, companies like Automattic and Geary’s Automatic.CSS must navigate complex webs of intellectual property rights to avoid potential conflicts and maintain their brand recognition.
Automattic’s claim has also drawn attention from WordPress developers and users, who have expressed concerns about the potential implications for the broader WordPress ecosystem. With WordPress.com serving as a hub for thousands of user-created websites and blogs, any disputes over trademarked terms could have far-reaching consequences for the platform’s users and contributors.
As Automattic and Automatic.CSS continue to navigate this complex intellectual property dispute, industry observers are watching closely to see how the company resolves this issue. The potential implications of Automattic’s claim extend beyond the immediate dispute with Automatic.CSS, highlighting the need for greater transparency and clarity around intellectual property rights in the tech industry.
This case may serve as a catalyst for greater awareness and discussion about intellectual property rights in the tech industry. Companies must prioritize clarity, transparency, and fairness in their branding strategies and business practices to build trust with their customers, contributors, and partners. By doing so, they can create a more positive and sustainable online environment for all.
In conclusion, Automattic’s assertion of ownership over the word “automatic” serves as a reminder of the importance of intellectual property protection in the digital age. As companies continue to build their brands and expand their offerings, they must navigate complex webs of trademark law to avoid potential conflicts and maintain their unique identities.