According to Roger Montti’s article on Search Engine Journal, “WP Engine Complaint Adds Unredacted Allegations About Mullenweg Plan,” WP Engine has filed a third amended complaint against WordPress co-founder Matt Mullenweg and Automattic, adding newly unredacted allegations that expand the scope of its antitrust claims.
Expanded Allegations In Amended Complaint
Montti reports that the updated complaint includes claims that Mullenweg identified at least ten competitors to pursue for trademark-related licensing payments. WP Engine alleges that it was made a “public example” as part of a broader plan to pressure other companies into agreements tied to trademark usage and financial contributions.
The complaint also includes internal communications that WP Engine characterizes as evidence of coercive conduct, including references to a “carrot” or “stick” approach when dealing with competitors.
“Nuclear War” Statement
One newly unredacted detail centers on language attributed to Mullenweg. While defendants previously argued that he did not use the phrase “nuclear war,” documents produced in discovery reportedly show him referencing what WP Engine describes as an “all-out nuclear war” response if disputes were not resolved.
WP Engine cites this language to support its claims of aggressive and exclusionary conduct.
Alleged Contact With Stripe
Another key allegation involves an email from Mullenweg to a Stripe executive, in which he allegedly urged Stripe to cancel contracts or partnerships with WP Engine. The complaint suggests this outreach occurred shortly after WP Engine filed its lawsuit and characterizes it as an attempt to harm WP Engine’s business relationships.
Stripe is a major payment processing platform used by many technology companies.
Claims Of Market Power
The amended complaint includes internal statements that WP Engine interprets as acknowledgments of market dominance, including references to the ability to “destroy all competition.” WP Engine argues these communications support its broader claims under the Sherman Act, alleging monopolization and coercion tied to trademark licensing and ecosystem control.
Montti notes that the complaint also references internal categorizations of competitors and discussions about financial arrangements with certain hosting providers, which WP Engine claims demonstrate inconsistent enforcement and selective treatment.
What Happens Next
As Montti explains, the newly unredacted material is intended to strengthen WP Engine’s antitrust case against Mullenweg and Automattic. The outcome now rests with the court, which will determine how the expanded allegations affect the ongoing legal dispute.
The case continues to draw significant attention within the WordPress ecosystem, raising broader questions about governance, trademark enforcement, competition, and control over core WordPress infrastructure.