We can still call it ES6 right?
Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
61–70 of 206 posts
Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#62I'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.
They don't really have any control over the name though. Agressive action to control it would just further alienate a community and cause a push back that would be damaging to Oracle...oh if only there were a push back.
Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#63Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
If you look at the Java timeline, the full Java marketing blitz wasn’t in full swing. JavaScript was announced on December 4, 1995 and Java (alpha) was public in March of the same year. A stable Java wasn’t available until 1996. It was more coordinated than riding the coattails.
Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#65I'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
This must be the reason that you can't say Legos online without being corrected.
I don't follow.
LEGO is the singular and the plural form. Thus "a LEGO brick" and "the LEGO bricks" are valid sentences. That's why some choose to correct Americas on their use of "legos." It has nothing to do with trademark law.
Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#66Should we actually start calling it "Yavascript"? ref: https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death...
Another comment pointed out that Netscape originally planned to call it LiceScript but was encouraged by Sun to change it JavaScript so I say if we're going to change the name we go with the original one. Either that or argue that the original holder of the Java trademark essentially blessed the use of its mark and continue calling it JavaScript.
Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#67It is unfortunate that "ECMAScript" is simply a terrible name. I understand why the term is used, but that doesn't make it inherently good, easy to say, or memorable.
Fortunately the ES shorthand is more workable (e.g. ES6, ES2017, etc).
Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#68I guess it depends on what your app "Javascript" does.
The key idea in trademark disputes/claims is that you are probably ok as long as your mark isn't confusingly similar to a widely known valid mark by another entity/owner. So if your Javascript app has nothing whatsoever to do with the programming language or computer in general, Apple shouldn't take down your app.
Eons ago Apple Computer was sued by Apple Corp (Beatle's record label) for trademark infringement. I wouldn't be too surprised if the Steve's deliberately named their computer company after the Beattles's corporate creature, being that Jobs was an ardent Beatles fan. They settled and agreed not to enter each other's business (ie, music and computer), so as not to confuse consumers. Apple is a bit hypocritical in this regard though -- in one trademark lawsuit, the company sued a mom-and-pop grocer in Poland whose website, A.pl, Apple claimed, violated Apple's trademark, not too long ago and was criticized for their insanely absurd legal tactics.
Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
That is more analogous to the current situation, but it’s also irrelevant to the issue of trademark genericization, which the parent of your comment was replying to someone else’s claim about.
Re: Oracle owns “JavaScript”, so Apple is taking down my app
#70I guess it depends on what your app "Javascript" does. The key idea in trademark disputes/claims is that you are probably ok as long as your mark isn't confusingly similar to a widely known valid mark by another entity/owner. So if your Javascript app has nothing whatsoever to do with the programming language or computer in general, Apple shouldn't take down your app. Eons ago Apple Computer was sued by Apple Corp (B…
From the head of the linked Reddit discussion:
Just received this email from Apple about my app(Html, css, javascript snippet editor).
In other words, it appears to be an app that's an IDE for various syntaxes, and JavaScript is one of them. IMHO (not a lawyer, but just observation) simply mentioning a trademark in reference to your product having something to do with it is completely legit. Otherwise we'd be seeing companies like Apple go after all the smartphone case manufacturers that mention "iPhone" since that's what their product is for.