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

Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

deno.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 201 posts

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#111

Post by chasil »

jsheard wrote: post #13
xmprt wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say 2019 is particularly old. I didn't even know IE still existed at the time - I thought it had been replaced by Edge.

Believe it or not IE was still supported in some capacity until 2022, and the underlying Trident engine is still supported until at least 2029. Edge has an official "IE Mode" which switches the backend from Chromium to Trident, effectively turning it into IE with a modern skin. Microsoft support lifecycles are no joke.

This is useful to me because a) it still allows http basic auth, which is disabled by policy in my workplace for Edge/Blink, and b) because it otherwise allows dual logins and credentials to the same site, in the same browser.

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#112

Post by kbutler »

Netscape wanted to call their new language "JavaScript" to piggy-back off the popularity of Java. Sun Microsystems owned Java(tm), and allowed Netscape to use the name while retaining the trademark. Netscape was purchased by AOL and then terminated. Oracle purchased Sun and all things Java, including the JavaScript trademark. Sun and Oracle have never done anything significant in the JavaScript world, but retain the trademark because of the Java name.

Since literally no one associates JavaScript with Oracle, unless aware of the name history and company acquisition history, it isn't a valid identifier of the source of "JavaScript", and should be canceled or transferred to an organization like EcmaScript International.

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#113

Post by kbutler »

kaycebasques wrote: post #102
rtpg wrote: post #9

I appreciate Ryan taking this up, and the updates are interesting. Obviously I'm not paying for the lawyers but it feels like "oh Oracle is trying to add months of delays" feels pretty normal. Only months! If the process just trudges along for a couple of years before reaching a "good" conclusion, still worth doing! And very happy that this is an actual legal proceeding and "try to sign a petition asking Oracle nicel…

> Sometimes you just gotta do the thing that takes forever. Great phrase

"schlep"

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#114

Post by jongjong »

The legal system is fundamentally broken, globally.

Last time I tried to start a legal action to claim damages against a big company for a very clear-cut case full of obvious fraud and deception (with plenty of evidence and many witnesses). I couldn't find a single lawyer willing to take my case for a share of the proceeds. The defendant was sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars in questionably-obtained cash and assets. To me, this is proof that the legal system is broken. It means the lawyers knew that the odds of winning were extremely low, regardless of the evidence.

I told them about the large amounts of money involved and told them my situation; many of them didn't even ask about what evidence I had. That's how unlikely it is to win a legal case for a non-corporate entity; lawyers won't even lift a finger about a case involving millions and literal fraud if the plaintiff doesn't have the right status, exposure or business connections.

If this is how they deal with the creator of Node.js with the support of Brendan Eich (who literally invented JavaScript), then imagine how they deal with the rest of us who aren't high-exposure individuals.

What's the point of even having a legal system if it only works for certain people?

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#115

Post by mech422 »

toddmorey wrote: post #37

Hear me out: the web / oss community could absolutely band together and rebrand JavaScript. Could be: LiveScript, WebScript, etc. There would be good support and we could do it fairly swiftly. To hell with Oracle.

I thought that was 'ecmascript' ??

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#116

Post by vips7L »

ilaksh wrote: post #95
toddmorey wrote: post #37

Hear me out: the web / oss community could absolutely band together and rebrand JavaScript. Could be: LiveScript, WebScript, etc. There would be good support and we could do it fairly swiftly. To hell with Oracle.

That's an interesting idea. Just to mention though: LiveScript is a really great language that compiles to JavaScript. https://livescript.net/

Wasn’t LiveScript JS’s original name?

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#117

Post by floydnoel »

t0ps0il wrote: post #74
floydnoel wrote: post #48

I'm glad this is being fought, Oracle is a demon. > The major implementations of JavaScript are in the browsers built by Mozilla, Google, Apple, and Microsoft Isn't MS's browser just Chromium? Weird to add them to the list when they don't build a browser any more. Why not add Brave, etc?

> Weird to add them to the list when they don't build a browser any more It seems like their browser engine is still being supported for use in "Universal Windows Platform" apps, or at least that's what Wikipedia says. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EdgeHTML

sure ok, you can still use it in UWP webviews (but you can also use the chromium version). but that seems like a really insignificant application compared to the rest of the browsers being listed.

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#118

Post by dwheeler »

EMIRELADERO wrote: post #107
mbo wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 lawnmo…

I started to dislike that quote somewhat. Why should we celebrate the fact that our society doesn't place moral pressure onto executives? Why should we find it acceptable that this is the status quo?

I urge you to watch the video to see the context. Cantrill does not think this is acceptable, never mind celebrated.

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#119

Post by eviks »

LoganDark wrote: post #82
rtpg wrote: post #9

I appreciate Ryan taking this up, and the updates are interesting. Obviously I'm not paying for the lawyers but it feels like "oh Oracle is trying to add months of delays" feels pretty normal. Only months! If the process just trudges along for a couple of years before reaching a "good" conclusion, still worth doing! And very happy that this is an actual legal proceeding and "try to sign a petition asking Oracle nicel…

> [0]: Again, I'm not paying for the lawyers or doing anything useful at all! It sucks that these kinds of disclaimers are necessary these days. I've also had more than my fair share of "you're not helping so you don't get to have an opinion"

Maybe the main thing this disclaimer does is make more people aware of the quoted criticism

Re: Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored

#120

Post by crabmusket »

krashidov wrote: post #90
bsimpson wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a passion project for the founder, who built his career on JS and is offended that Oracle (a company famous for deploying lawyers instead of technological expertise) claims to control it.

I think it's a little more than a passion project since it's posted on the official deno blog. I don't think it's a net negative of a pursuit, but I follow the founder of bun on twitter and he just keeps shipping shit whereas the most I hear from Deno is this lawsuit. I'm not saying Deno doesn't have merits, I just wonder if this is the thing they should be focused on

> the most I hear from Deno is this lawsui

Two days ago: https://deno.com/blog/jsr-open-governance-board

Maybe don't trust your Twitter feed to be a balanced information diet.

But yes, Bun's current strategy is "churn out code" whereas Deno has a different pace and approach. They're trying to build different things, and have a lot less catch-up to play than Bun.

Post reply on HN