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

Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

#61

Post by EMM_386 »

gary_0 wrote: post #13
worik wrote: post #6

What are the grounds for invalidating the trademark? > we’ll start discovery to show how "JavaScript" is widely recognized as a generic term But "JavaScript" is always referring to the same thing, it is not a term for "in browser scripting". Am I missing something?

Whenever anyone says "JavaScript" they actually mean "ECMAScript", which is the language browsers and scripting engines actually implement. The Web standard documents cannot use the term "JavaScript" because of the trademark issue. There isn't even such a thing as "Oracle JavaScript", they are sitting on the trademark without using it.

I had ECMAScript on my resume (as JavaScript/ECMAScript) and a technical recruiter asked me what that was.

"Oh, I've never heard of ECMAScript before".

Well, it's a thing. You'll have to trust me on that one.

Re: Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

#62

Post by nayuki »

bawolff wrote: post #49
nayuki wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nor did they sue ActionScript (Macromedia Flash's implementation of JavaScript), CoffeeScript (a separate language that compiles to JavaScript, and has a name very much evoking Java).

I don't see any reason why that would matter. The name "actionscript" does not have the word "java" in it. The relavent part is they didn't sue anyone using the name "javascript". Even if they had a valid trademark (which i doubt) that doesn't prevent anyone from selling a similar product under a different name.

I was replying to that_guy_iain, who pointed out that Oracle didn't sue Microsoft for TypeScript. Notice that TypeScript does not have the word "Java" in it either.

Re: Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

#63

Post by anthk »

nayuki wrote: post #36
that_guy_iain wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the fact Oracle didn't sue for trademark infringement on that or TypeScript which is often referred to as JavaScript is probably not going to help Oracle here. But I doubt Oracle cares either way.

Nor did they sue ActionScript (Macromedia Flash's implementation of JavaScript), CoffeeScript (a separate language that compiles to JavaScript, and has a name very much evoking Java).

There's are tons of libre licensed Java JVM's which names related to coffee.

Re: Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

#64

Post by wodenokoto »

mananaysiempre wrote: post #19
mbreese wrote: post #7

I expect that this was the predicted outcome? And that all we are seeing here is the beginning of the process, rather than the end? On the face of it, JavaScript seems like a pretty solid trademark. But, to me, it’s really not clear how much control Oracle has asserted over it…

(Not a lawyer.) To have rights to a trademark, you have to use it in, well, trade. It’s not enough for a term to refer to a specific thing in normal usage, you must have a widely recognized claim on that thing. It should be in the customer’s interest that your thing not be confusable with thing-alikes that others may offer, specifically by having an exclusive right to be sold as the thing. And Oracle demonstrably doe…

Oracle has a pretty strong claim on Java, and JavaScript was named after Java explicitly to piggy-back on the that names recognition and success.

It’s bit like saying McDonald’s shouldn’t have trademark claims on “McDonald’s carbonara” because they don’t deal in Italian cuisine (that much)

Re: Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

#66

Post by orf »

gklitz wrote: post #59
gary_0 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever anyone says "JavaScript" they actually mean "ECMAScript", which is the language browsers and scripting engines actually implement. The Web standard documents cannot use the term "JavaScript" because of the trademark issue. There isn't even such a thing as "Oracle JavaScript", they are sitting on the trademark without using it.

> Whenever anyone says "JavaScript" they actually mean "ECMAScript", which is the language browsers and scripting engines actually implement. It’s the exact opposite though. Whenever someone says ECMAScript they actually mean “I want to say JavaScript but for legal reasons I’m using another name for it” but that also happens so rarely that it’s not worth considering. If I invent a new term for iPads and say “well act…

> and people use it correctly to refer to the same one thing.

Yes, ECMAScript, standardized here: https://ecma-international.org/publications-and-standards/st...

Re: Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

#68

Post by thayne »

gklitz wrote: post #60
thayne wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JavaScript can refer to the standard specification of ECMAScript, as well as the many implementations notably including v8 (chromium, node, deno), JavaScriptCore (webkit), and spidermonkey (Firefox), as well as some lesser known ones like duktape and QuickJS. And it can also be used to refer to an ECMAScript implementation plus an additional runtime platform like the Web API, or something like node or deno. And Oracl…

People use the term iPad to refer to non Apple tablets as well. That’s not an argument against Apples trademark. People may not like Oracle, but the arguments against them owning the trademark on the grounds that it’s used to refer to the thing that it actually is, are extemely weak. I can see the non-use argument being a viable path though.

> People use the term iPad to refer to non Apple tablets as well. That’s not an argument against Apples trademark.

IANAL, but my understanding is that it actually is, if it becomes common enough, and Apple doesn't try to prevent such usage of the term. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark.

Re: Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

#69

Post by heresie-dabord »

nayuki wrote: post #34
p4ul wrote: post #27

"Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison." [1]. [1.] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=2308s

> And by the way, and I've already fallen into this trap here, do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison. Because if you--you need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawn mower. Lawnmower just does, like, mows the lawn. Like, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think like, oh the lawnmower hates me, lawnmow…

> you need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower.

If a large enough number of people thought this way, they would awaken one morning to find their garages or yard sheds surrounded by Oracle lawyers.

Re: Oracle Will Not Voluntarily Withdraw JavaScript Trademark

#70

Post by thiht »

worthless-trash wrote: post #32
aperrien wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While descriptive, I'd think a catchier name might be in order. As a plus, that can be used to draw people away from any Oracle branding.

Just call it Browserscript, and be done with it. Call it what it is.

> Call it what it is

NOT Browserscript then. JS moved beyond the browser almost 3 decades ago (rhino.jar, anyone?) and became mainstream on the server side almost a decade ago.

Post reply on HN