Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 206 posts

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#51

Post by IAmEveryone »

brlewis wrote: post #14

Is anyone else bothered by the likelihood that the writer of this sentence doesn't believe it's true? The unauthorized display of our client's intellectual property is likely to cause consumers encountering this app to mistakenly believe that it emanates from, or is provided under a license from, Oracle.

Let's not go overboard with the criticism. It's a standard phrase expressing a probability, because it's impossible to predict with absolute certainty.

(I have my doubts regarding that probability, but that's a different matter)

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#53

Post by bch »

thristian wrote: post #30
jannes wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, so JavaScript was conceived at Netscape in 1995 according to Wikipedia. After the release Sun must have registered the "JavaScript" trademark instead of going after Netscape. Any idea why they did that? Wasn't their inaction risking to lose the entire Java trademark by not defending it against Netscape? Does anyone know more about the history here? What would Google do today if someone named their language DartS…

Sun was encouraging Netscape to include the JVM in their browser for applets, and generally trying to promote Java as the Next Big Thing. The in-browser scripting language was going to be called "LiveScript", but Sun asked them to change it to "JavaScript" to strengthen the Java brand, and make the syntax more closely resemble C-family languages.

Wow - I heard it was called JavaScript to cash in on the familiarity of the name Java, but I didn’t realize it was at the behest of Sun.

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#54

Post by swsieber »

marshray wrote: post #22
Wehrdo wrote: post #15

I'm surprised that "JavaScript" has not become a generic trademark [0]. Examples from the Wikipedia article include Thermos, Chapstick, and Dumpster. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark

A lot of what's said and written about genericized trademarks is just utter BS. Go ahead and market a product named Thermos, Chapstick, Band-Aid, or Kleenex in the US and see how far you get.

That's not the issue here. Try selling a product called "Kleenex Dispenser" or "Man's Guide to Kleenex" and see how far you get. That's a more analogous example.

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#55

Post by matte_black »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #12
blasdel wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more accurately "take money" — don't anthropomorphize them: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5170246

Heh and adding on to that... "the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil"

But the root of all evil is believing there is only one truth and that you are in possession of it.

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#56

Post by cryptonector »

cobbzilla wrote: post #43
cryptonector wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A test case might be needed. If Oracle were to sue a deep-pocketed competitor over the trademark, then we might find a court reaching the conclusion that the trademark has been diluted and the name is now generic. But if Oracle does no such thing, and sues only shallow-pocketed "nobodies", then the legal status of the mark will remain unclear. My guess is Oracle would only do the latter, and that they're doing it bec…

I love your riff on Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to a corporate lawyer." Shall we call it Cryptonector's Razor? You invented it, you name it :) edit: someone else (not me) should name the principle that explains why so few people on HN have any sense of humor whatsoever.

Hmmm, I don't think I've heard anyone else express this razor, so, yeah, sure, you can call it after me, though it does seem vain of me to say that you should, so let's let you call it whatever you want.

As to the HN-has-little-humor phenomenon, well, some people seem to think that dry == authoritative. That's BS, of course, but I don't know what to call that. I'll think about it.

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#57

Post by bobbyi_settv »

Wehrdo wrote: post #15

I'm surprised that "JavaScript" has not become a generic trademark [0]. Examples from the Wikipedia article include Thermos, Chapstick, and Dumpster. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark

Most likely, that is exactly why they are pursuing actions like this one. They're worried that if they don't, they'll lose control over the name, not that this app itself is costing them anything.

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#58

Post by cryptonector »

coldacid wrote: post #47
cryptonector wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A test case might be needed. If Oracle were to sue a deep-pocketed competitor over the trademark, then we might find a court reaching the conclusion that the trademark has been diluted and the name is now generic. But if Oracle does no such thing, and sues only shallow-pocketed "nobodies", then the legal status of the mark will remain unclear. My guess is Oracle would only do the latter, and that they're doing it bec…

>Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to a corporate lawyer. Are corporate lawyers not the physical manifestation of malice itself?

Not always. It's just difficult for them to do the right thing when it's so easy to pretend you have the law on your side that that makes it OK to take the 800 lb gorilla you work for and then go sit it on some nobody. And too many executives can't bring themselves to tell the lawyers to worry about legal things and let the executives make the business decisions. I've seen this time and again. Inexperienced or just lame executives often let the lawyers force their decisions.

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#59

Post by brlewis »

IAmEveryone wrote: post #51
brlewis wrote: post #14

Is anyone else bothered by the likelihood that the writer of this sentence doesn't believe it's true? The unauthorized display of our client's intellectual property is likely to cause consumers encountering this app to mistakenly believe that it emanates from, or is provided under a license from, Oracle.

Let's not go overboard with the criticism. It's a standard phrase expressing a probability , because it's impossible to predict with absolute certainty. (I have my doubts regarding that probability, but that's a different matter)

Yes, "likely" is expressing a probability. Substitute "unlikely" into their sentence and it would still be expressing a probability, except it would be a believable one.

I stand by my original comment. There's nothing overboard about it, and nothing demanding absolute certainty.

Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app

#60

Post by Manozco »

djsumdog wrote: post #27
cryptonector wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm, we just need to find the right lawyer there and put the thought in their head.

You need some inception; make them think it was their idea.

Nah, you need to make them think it is going to bring them money. They'll happily take someone's else idea in this case ;)
Post reply on HN