TypeScript solves this.
WebAssembly solves it better.
Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
41–50 of 96 posts
Re: Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
#42JavaScript is dead. Long live YavaScript.
Re: Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
#43Maybe we could change the filetype from .js to .bho https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litigation_involving_Apple_Inc...
I just learned about this case today. Based purely on the Wikipedia description, Sagan's request seems reasonable, from a moral perspective at least. I have no idea why Apple (or its engineers) would be so butthurt about it.
Because it was just a silly internal code name for an unreleased product and Carl Sagon was just being a killjoy to his own fans. That he continued to escalate with lawsuits makes him look ridiculous frankly...
Re: Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
#44TypeScript solves this.
I mean, its just about the trademark. ECMAScript solves this.
Re: Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just learned about this case today. Based purely on the Wikipedia description, Sagan's request seems reasonable, from a moral perspective at least. I have no idea why Apple (or its engineers) would be so butthurt about it.
Because it was just a silly internal code name for an unreleased product and Carl Sagon was just being a killjoy to his own fans. That he continued to escalate with lawsuits makes him look ridiculous frankly...
His reason was "concerned that it would become a product endorsement," and it was after the name was "publicized," which sounds reasonable to me.
The joy can only go so far, IMHO. If the namesake person asked for it, you comply—pretty simple. I can totally see why people aren’t comfortable with their name being used without permission, even without the endorsement concern.
Re: Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
#46I'm really curious about Oracle's motivation for fighting this. What value do they see in continuing to hold a trademark they aren't really using, and no one associates with them anyway?
It’s their asset. It came with their $7.4 billion acquisition of Sun. I know it’s popular to hate on Oracle, and it’s deserved in many cases, but any company in this situation would defend their IP. Obviously it has value or somebody wouldn’t be trying to cancel it.
Re: Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
In America each party typically bears their own costs.
Ah! I just checked with Claude and it says: > In the United States, the general rule is known as the "American Rule" - each party typically pays their own attorney's fees and court costs, regardless of who wins the case. This is different from many other countries that follow the "English Rule" where the losing party pays the winner's legal fees.
For the curious, one reason for the difference in rules is the different approaches to enforcing rights.
In the US there is a tendency to make private civil suits for damages a big part of this, and to rely less on government agencies to investigate and take enforcement actions.
In much of the rest of the world the is more of a tendency to have government agencies handle it. It's enough of a difference that people in the rest of the world often don't even know that a private civil suit is an option. (You can see this with GDPR. Article 79 gives individuals a right to sue, but most people seem to think their only option is to complain to a government data protection authority).
Anyway, since the US is depending on private civil suits to enforce rights the English rule of winner pays could greatly discourage those who are not well off (who are often the people most likely to have their rights violated) from suing when their rights violator has significantly more resources.
Re: Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it was just a silly internal code name for an unreleased product and Carl Sagon was just being a killjoy to his own fans. That he continued to escalate with lawsuits makes him look ridiculous frankly...
His reason was "concerned that it would become a product endorsement," and it was after the name was "publicized," which sounds reasonable to me. The joy can only go so far, IMHO. If the namesake person asked for it, you comply—pretty simple. I can totally see why people aren’t comfortable with their name being used without permission, even without the endorsement concern.
Personally, I think the subsequent libel lawsuits demonstrates it was all just ego
Re: Oracle files notice of appearance for JavaScript trademark [pdf]
#49I'm really curious about Oracle's motivation for fighting this. What value do they see in continuing to hold a trademark they aren't really using, and no one associates with them anyway?
> Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphising Larry Ellison. You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' -- lawnmower doesn't give a shit about you, lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmower. Don't fall into that trap about Oracle. — Brian Cantrill