JavaScript is a trademark owned by Oracle • Hacker News Board

Re: JavaScript is a trademark owned by Oracle

#81

Post by petercooper » Fri, Sep 26, 2014, 11:06 AM UTC

jameshart wrote: post #67

laumars wrote: post #50

This shouldn't be news to anyone who's old enough to remember the internet in the 90's. Back then Microsoft named their EMCAScript implementation "JScript" to avoid problems with Sun's trademark (I'm sure everyone on here is already aware that Oracle bought Sun a few years back). However I don't think this trademark is worth anything to Oracle any longer. Trademarks need to be defended or they're lost. This is why Wo…

Let's be careful with terminology here. I'm (also) not an IP lawyer, but as I understand it your use of the term 'public domain' here is inappropriate. If you're arguing that JavaScript has become genericized - on the basis, presumably, that there are multiple institutions making available various implementations of JavaScript without acknowledging or licensing Oracle's trademark - I'm not sure that's correct, and ty…

You're right, but I believe even Brendan Eich has said (while CTO of Mozila) he thinks the trademark is likely indefensible.

Re: JavaScript is a trademark owned by Oracle

#82

Post by BrendanEich » Sun, Sep 28, 2014, 3:46 AM UTC

Stratoscope wrote: post #69

pluma wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it from Crockford's retelling and what I've read on the web and heard in podcasts, Sun was concerned that LiveScript could be seen as a competitor to Java if both were present in the browser. Netscape wanted Java but wasn't willing to kill off their scripting language, so they agreed to name it JavaScript to make it sound like the two are related (and JS being "merely" a scripting language, people wou…

> Considering the original JS already contained the syntax Crockford would eventually define as JSON, you could say they managed to create not one but two languages at once. No, the original version of JavaScript did not include object literals and array literals - the two foundations of JSON. Object and array literals were introduced in JavaScript 1.2: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/New_...…

Right, and note to grand-parent post: Crockford was not at Netscape so he's not the eyewitness you're looking for.

I created JS1.2 and SpiderMonkey in fall 1996, as described in that JS Jabber podcast. Find this part in the transcript:

"I started to rewrite the VM, pay off technical debt, and I wrote what became SpiderMonkey. The original Mocha VM was not SpiderMonkey."

Object and array initialiser syntax was inspired by Python of the time (1996 would be Python 1.x, x around 6 IINM), but I made property names literals when spelled without quotes, as identifiers (same as the implicitly quoted name on the right of dot in member expressions).

In ES6 (in imitation of computed property access using square brackets) you can finally compute property names in object initialisers too:

var obj = { [nameExpr]: valueExpr };

Re: JavaScript is a trademark owned by Oracle

#83

Post by Telematica » Sun, Sep 28, 2014, 3:53 AM UTC

BrendanEich wrote: post #82

Stratoscope wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Considering the original JS already contained the syntax Crockford would eventually define as JSON, you could say they managed to create not one but two languages at once. No, the original version of JavaScript did not include object literals and array literals - the two foundations of JSON. Object and array literals were introduced in JavaScript 1.2: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/New_...…

Right, and note to grand-parent post: Crockford was not at Netscape so he's not the eyewitness you're looking for. I created JS1.2 and SpiderMonkey in fall 1996, as described in that JS Jabber podcast. Find this part in the transcript: "I started to rewrite the VM, pay off technical debt, and I wrote what became SpiderMonkey. The original Mocha VM was not SpiderMonkey." Object and array initialiser syntax was inspire…

Amazing. There is a bunch of stuff to ask for about JS API...

Re: JavaScript is a trademark owned by Oracle

#84

Post by BrendanEich » Sun, Sep 28, 2014, 4:24 AM UTC

_wp3r wrote: post #40

jonnyscholes wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone interested is JS history, this is the most comprehensive explanation of where JavaScript got its name I've heard (from Brendan Eichs POV)[1]. The podcast also deals with lots of other JS related history like what languages influenced it, the circumstances it was created under and the politics surrounding its conception. It's a great listen. [1] http://javascriptjabber.com/124-jsj-the-origin-of-javascript..…

This needs to be a parent comment. The episode was one of the best JJ episodes and a great JS backgound piece. Highly recommended.

FWIW, submitted here the other week, w/o comments:

https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=BrendanEich

Re: JavaScript is a trademark owned by Oracle

#85

Post by pluma » Thu, Oct 02, 2014, 11:49 AM UTC

BrendanEich wrote: post #82

Stratoscope wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Considering the original JS already contained the syntax Crockford would eventually define as JSON, you could say they managed to create not one but two languages at once. No, the original version of JavaScript did not include object literals and array literals - the two foundations of JSON. Object and array literals were introduced in JavaScript 1.2: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/New_...…

Right, and note to grand-parent post: Crockford was not at Netscape so he's not the eyewitness you're looking for. I created JS1.2 and SpiderMonkey in fall 1996, as described in that JS Jabber podcast. Find this part in the transcript: "I started to rewrite the VM, pay off technical debt, and I wrote what became SpiderMonkey. The original Mocha VM was not SpiderMonkey." Object and array initialiser syntax was inspire…

Okay, so you didn't create the syntax JSON was based on until JS1.2? What I was getting at remains true then, though: you created JS and you created the object and array literal syntax that Crockford then "discovered" (to quote Crockford) and defined as JSON. Even if you didn't do it in the same couple of days it took you to create the original JS itself ;)