This is a stupid non-issue. You can go ahead and call it JavaScript despite what Oracle does or doesn't say.
Better yet, though: don't call it JavaScript—call it JS. "JavaScript" is and always was a dumb name. "JS" is not only fine, but better—and not because "JS" is particularly good, but because "JavaScript" itself isn't exactly hard to beat.
The only thing left to do is for the spec authors (which includes signatories to this petition) and the rest of TC-39 to say so; the next edition of ECMA-262 should modify the existing disclaimer in the preface about "JavaScript" being an Oracle trademark to state unequivocally that "JavaScript"—an unfortunate vestige of an ill-considered marketing decision in the 1900s—is a deprecated way to refer to the language not otherwise terribly well-known as ECMAScript and that the recommended way to refer to it is simply as "JS".
sigzero 114 days ago [-]
There is nothing better about "JS" over "JavaScript".
johannes1234321 114 days ago [-]
"JavaSciript" implies it's some scripting language related to Java, which was originally an idea, where it was meant to control Java Applets. But that is not a thing anymore. Thus the name makes no sense. "JS" is just a name only conflicting with my initials.
layer8 114 days ago [-]
The name was exclusively chosen based on marketing considerations, to have it benefit from the Java hype of the time. It was actually called LiveScript before.
jbverschoor 114 days ago [-]
They succeeded though
bryanrasmussen 114 days ago [-]
but "JS" implies it is some sort of amalgam of the J and S programming languages - or it doesn't and probably the Java implication doesn't exist anymore either - who really, on hearing the name in a modern context is going to think "hey, it must be a scripting version of that one really old programming language granddad in the office is always reminiscing about"?
lkirkwood 114 days ago [-]
... do you think people don't use Java anymore?
bryanrasmussen 114 days ago [-]
sure they use it, but I sort of feel the groups that use it and JavaScript are no longer likely to cross over each other, and thus new devs will not be making the historical mistake of rhetorical misunderstanding that was made in the old days.
daymanstep 110 days ago [-]
Full stack developers often use both Java and JavaScript.
nailer 114 days ago [-]
We can avoid your initials conflicting with anything by abbreviating your name to “JavaScript” now that is available.
cxr 114 days ago [-]
Wrong, and that's not the question, anyway.
There is nothing worse about "JS" over "JavaScript".
(Whereas the reverse is not true—there is something worse about "JavaScript" over "JS". Several somethings.)
rz2k 114 days ago [-]
It works well as a modifier, and makes it easy to search for projects that are named after other common concepts or objects. It's also easy and natural- sounding to say for English speakers. Compared to other modifiers, it's more like "-dot-com" than "-lang", or even worse "libre-".
nailer 114 days ago [-]
It’s smaller. The logo already just says JS. It doesn’t boost Java’s reputation. And people in the ecosystem don’t have to worry about oracle threatening them.
kragen 114 days ago [-]
javascript is an oracle registered trademark, js isn't
Brian_K_White 114 days ago [-]
There are at least 3 things better about JS over JavaScript.
Eric_WVGG 114 days ago [-]
Isn't the technical name ECMAScript?
What would be really cool is if the community could just rally around the original name, LiveScript… it never had anything to do with Java, let that go…
agumonkey 114 days ago [-]
Makes me wonder if there are rules to use area names for your brands. Can I start Tennesseescript ?
kragen 114 days ago [-]
this is an interesting angle. maybe the js luminaries signing this open letter can get support from the government in jakarta. i didn't realize this, but a hundred and fifty-six million people live in literal java
agumonkey 114 days ago [-]
early adopters of java-RT
kragen 114 days ago [-]
i don't think oracle does anything in order to earn goodwill or because it's the right thing. they're structurally immune to moral suasion. don't forget that oracle was the company that sued google for the independent reimplementation of java they used in android. if you want oracle to do something, you either need to offer them a lot of money or level an extremely credible, well-financed legal threat at them
as agumonkey implicitly points out in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41559110, though, 'java' is the name of the world's most popular island. i wonder if the indonesian government could be persuaded to support the trademark revocation
Iceland the country won its trademark case agains Iceland the supermarket chain so there is probably something to it.
EUIPO "[Iceland Supermarket] cannot reasonably trademark the name of a country that has been around since the 9th century".
falcor84 114 days ago [-]
I didn't know that was decided, and was just catching up on it now. This was a fun read:
> Mr Walker and other high-level executives from Iceland (the supermarket), took an emergency delegation to Iceland (the country), where they were met with a cold shoulder.
It wasn't really a java implementation - they used the APIs, but broke compatibility.
cxr 114 days ago [-]
Geez, not this shit again. (One of the many ways you could tell Oracle was doomed in trying to find and convincingly argue a tenable position against Google: half the people half the time argued that Google should be sued for implementing Java, and the other half the time argued that they should be sued for not implementing Java.)
yarg 114 days ago [-]
If you can't run jars, it's not a java implementation.
nineteen999 113 days ago [-]
You mean zip files with a jar extension?
yarg 113 days ago [-]
Yes the external format of a jar file is a zip - but there is also a specification for the internal structure and file formats, as well as information like the minimum java version required to execute (and all sorts of other crap, I can't really say since I haven't actually looked - these are just some sane enough minimums).
But anyway, no need to be snide.
falcor84 114 days ago [-]
Oh, I wasn't aware of that - what did they change?
yarg 114 days ago [-]
The ability to launch a jar?
kragen 113 days ago [-]
to me this sounds like a claim that gcc on linux isn't really a c compiler because linux can't run a .com file compiled with turbo c for ms-dos
Most /populous/ island is what I presume you mean.
kragen 114 days ago [-]
yes, thank you, that was a stupid mistake on my part!
114 days ago [-]
elzbardico 114 days ago [-]
“It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity! Or remorse or fear and it absolutely will not stop!... ever... until you are dead!”
saati 114 days ago [-]
I don't think your death stops them from going after your estate.
whartung 114 days ago [-]
They're clinging to it because of the "java" part, not the "script" part.
And they'll hold on to that tightly.
The most manifest example of this is simply what they made the Eclipse org jump through when they dropped, now, "Jakarta" EE. That was not a small rock in the Java pond at the time when we had to go through the Great Renaming.
But they did it anyway because the packages used to be named "javax", and Oracle was not going to let that go.
devsda 114 days ago [-]
> That was not a small rock in the Java pond at the time when we had to go through the Great Renaming.
Haha. It still hasn't ended actually.
Slowly all the old software that supported only java ee are now (nearing) EOL.
Only recently I've seen teams planning and preparing for the "move".
vips7L 114 days ago [-]
IIRC it was also because the Eclipse community didn’t want to go through the Java Enhancement Process which the javax name is tied to.
elzbardico 114 days ago [-]
People falling in the ages old trap of antropormophizing Oracle executives.
CSMastermind 114 days ago [-]
> 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 (https://youtu.be/-zRN7XLCRhc?t=33m1s)
For those unfamiliar. Worth a watch.
mp05 114 days ago [-]
Have you seen Larry lately? How do you look like that at 80 years old? He must be a cyborg.
RankingMember 114 days ago [-]
He can afford the top-shelf blood boys
psychoslave 114 days ago [-]
I heard that blood transfusion in Switzerland clinics, using blood of young healthy people of course, works pretty well.
Edit: as I watched the video again I finally caught on the fact that RollerBlades are a brand of inline-skates. In Belgium we called them inline-skates.
It's interesting to see how brands-as-identifiers change based on language and countries. My Walloon friend calls tape Scotch, but I don't.
vlakreeh 114 days ago [-]
Unfortunately yes, they'll send you a C&D if you pop up on an Oracle lawyer's radar. A coworker of mine had a course named "Rust for JavaScript developers" and received a C&D from Oracle.
codemonke 114 days ago [-]
I just noticed that that video has a copyright notice at the end for Velcro BVBA (which I think is Belgian). Apparently it's a swiss invention. I had always assumed velcro was an American company, because in my language we don't say velcro either.
rpastuszak 114 days ago [-]
Tangent, but in Poland these are called "Iceskaterollers" (łyżworolki). Now I wonder how my mother tongue compares to, say, English in terms of gzip compression efficiency.
alberth 114 days ago [-]
There’s lots of colloquially used names by the general public that technically infringe trademark.
“Aspirin”, “elevators”, “laundromat” are just a few examples.
Even “App Store” was trademarked (by Apple).
connicpu 114 days ago [-]
The general public can't infringe a trademark unless they're selling a competing product ;) Interestingly, Aspirin becoming a generic term in many countries was more of a result of WW1 as the allied powers seized various things from German companies (like Bayer) for war reparations, including intellectual property like trademarks. It was technically purchased by an American company for use in the US after the war, but I guess they didn't defend the mark very well and it quickly fell into genericism.
throwanem 114 days ago [-]
Genericization is by definition not infringement.
WaffleIronMaker 114 days ago [-]
I had no idea Heroin was originally a trademarked cough suppressant.
dreamcompiler 114 days ago [-]
As you might expect, it's an exceptionally effective cough suppressant.
CuriouslyC 114 days ago [-]
I think in the case of app store, that's suitably generic that someone with money could easily fight it.
merb 114 days ago [-]
Well done stuff probably is not enforceable, like App Store. That is too generic
olliej 114 days ago [-]
I'm not sure - trademark law is tricky - "The Container Store" is trademarked (and while you might say "App Store" is too generic, but I don't recall the term existing prior to "The App Store", so this might be a "Hoover" or similar situation).
I remember McDonald's used[?] to have "All Beef" as a trademark for their burger patties (I also recall them getting in trouble in NZ as just because they're "All Beef" brand doesn't mean you can advertise them as "All Beef Patties" in a way that is clearly intended to imply they're "all beef")
xigoi 114 days ago [-]
App Store is not the same case as Hoover because the name is a literal description of what it is. It’s like a coffee producer trademarking the name Coffee.
alberth 113 days ago [-]
Like Apple suing over trademark to an apple fruit producer.
The letter makes points that the trademark is already abandoned. I'm not familiar with trademark laws, but if the trademark is already abandoned, why the need for the letter?
sjsdaiuasgdia 114 days ago [-]
Oracle's lawyers dutifully renew the trademark annually. Despite their lack of active use, this leaves the door open for future use. It creates a nebulous state where Oracle could choose to initiate a costly legal action against someone using the trademark.
One of those situations where the law can be on your side but the real problem is if you can afford the legal battle.
Finnucane 114 days ago [-]
As the letter notes, Oracle has never actually taken any kind of action to keep people from using the name. They don't even make performative reminders. They know their claim on the mark is weak and they aren't going to waste a lot of lawyer time on it. But it's Oracle, so they won't willingly give up anything that might be worth more than a dime. This is just to note their continued non-action when the USPTO is asked to nullify the mark.
lokar 114 days ago [-]
It will still cost whoever oracles decides to vindictively go after (driven by some unrelated dispute) a bunch of money and trouble.
JavaScript is a registered trademark. It would be easier for everyone if Oracle released the trademark registration than for the letter signers to file a legal petition requesting the USPTO cancel the registration.
lambada 114 days ago [-]
The site explicitly says they tried to get Oracle to release the trademark before, and that this is their final attempt at doing so before filing wigh the USPTO.
Joel_Mckay 114 days ago [-]
In general, unenforced Trademarks are worthless, but prevent other people trademarking the name. Trademarks are regional, and must be registered in each country even if a part of WIPO.
Some countries, the trademarks are market sector specific, but in other places cover all use cases for the name/mark.
It is highly recommended to trademark commercial products/names in each country of import. Otherwise your company could end up getting sued/imports-seized by an opportunistic a*hole that does nothing except sneak copyright/trademark rights.
Oracle is smart, and will sit on the IP like any business person should.
Most people that complain about trademarks/copyright have never been ripped off for a few hundred thousand by import/customs rules, or had counterfeit products show up for warranty repairs/returns.
IP is messy for sure, but it is better to negotiate from a position of legal power asymmetry when dealing with unreasonable individuals. Some people are crazy... had a few cons harassing one of the engineers a long time back, and needed legal to politely "ask" them to find another hobby. =3
lucacasonato 114 days ago [-]
It is practically abandoned, but unless the USPTO or a US court says that that is so, it is not legally abandoned. That is a problem because the confusion and insecurity about the trademark remains until it is legally considered abandoned.
That's why we need to file a petition with the US Patent and Trademark office.
joshstrange 114 days ago [-]
Abandoned as in "they aren't using it", but they do keep renewing the trademark so they still hold it.
SoftTalker 114 days ago [-]
I have a domain name that I haven't used in years. I keep renewing it though, just in case.
culi 114 days ago [-]
Not the same thing. Trademark abandonment is a specific legal concept. You can apply for regular renewal of a trademark, but others can argue that you are not actually utilizing the tm. In this case, JavaScript is not legally abandoned but the letter argues it should be
114 days ago [-]
Animats 114 days ago [-]
Oracle's claims to be making "use in commerce" of Javascript are listed here: [1]
There's a link to the non-Oracle page for node.js download, and to Oracle Javascript Extension Toolkit. Weak, but arguable.
According to comments in this post, it appears that Oracle is defending the use of the name "JavaScript" in some cases. However, the internet is filled with various resources that use "JavaScript" in their names. I'm curious if there are any confirmed instances of Oracle suing someone for using this name, or if these are just false rumors and Oracle is merely reserving the right to do so in the future.
orev 114 days ago [-]
When JavaScript was introduced, Java was already gaining traction, and the name JavaScript was chosen to ride on the coattails of that popularity. From that perspective, there’s a pretty good argument in favor of whoever holds the Java trademark, which happens to be Oracle.
I have definitely run into people who say things like “they wrote a Java script”, which actually turned out to be a Java program.
znpy 114 days ago [-]
Or maybe shall we all start calling it EcmaScript?
If anything to break with the old (IE6 and similar) javascripts that are still there, running somewhere.
nashashmi 114 days ago [-]
What issues is this causing among developers? I personally think JS should be sunsetted and spun off as a set of 2nd gen languages like typescript and rust and Ecma. It is clear that Oracle is not working on JS. The browsers are. The w3c is(?). Let them coalesce onto a spin off version. Like WebScript.
Borborygymus 114 days ago [-]
It's long gone the time people should stop doing business with Oracle.
theanonymousone 114 days ago [-]
The HN title is wrong. The missing word significantly changes the meaning.
jonny_eh 114 days ago [-]
Oracle still uses Java though. You can't spell JavaScript without Java. Regardless, JavaScript is now much larger than Java, so the trademark for JS should at least revert to the public.
jandrese 114 days ago [-]
I remember the day Netscape added "Javascript" and many people complained that the name was confusing because it had nothing at all to do with Java. It was especially confusing because people used to embed actual Java applications in webpages as "applets". It was a dumb marketing move right from the start and it has caused nothing but trouble ever since. It's way past time for the name to be changed.
Pet_Ant 114 days ago [-]
> Regardless, JavaScript is now much larger than Java
Curious, but in what way? Java still drive lots of enterprise and banks, and I cant' say I've seen any Node.js in the backend at any of these places.
lucacasonato 114 days ago [-]
JavaScript is the world's most popular programming language.
That graph can't be right. Everyone knows it's a toss-up between Rust and Clojure. :)
Pet_Ant 114 days ago [-]
Sorry, but the second largest "language" on that graph is HTML/CSS. I mean that's not even a programming language.
jonny_eh 111 days ago [-]
So ignore that entry
jajko 114 days ago [-]
That's a poor stats to be polite. SQL is no programming language, PL/SQL and its variants are. Without scripting languages you can't embed much logic in it.
I also wonder how they count multi users, I can easily mark 10 of those if not more.
> HTML/CSS were the most commonly used programming languages
I am sorry but that can't be taken seriously, then I know a ton of Excel developers, and wait till I get to Powerpoint ones.
114 days ago [-]
ASalazarMX 114 days ago [-]
There are enough open source interpreters/engines. Let's fork it and call it WebPageScript.
jonny_eh 114 days ago [-]
I'd call it "JS"
jbverschoor 114 days ago [-]
Well.. ecmascript got a lot of marketing value from JavaScript and thus Java. If it was called something else it would’ve never become so big
worik 114 days ago [-]
I agree It is time to let JavaScript go
I do not mean the trademark
jay-barronville 114 days ago [-]
Oracle executives are scheduling a meeting right now just to read this letter together and laugh at it.
All jokes aside though, they don’t care, and frankly speaking, despite how much sense it makes for them to release the trademark, they have no reason to care.
To seriously move the needle on this issue, you need deep pockets and lawyers.
RadixDLT 114 days ago [-]
javascript should be renamed to LavaScript
sun microsystems - sun -> lava
java volcano -> lava
user_of_the_wek 112 days ago [-]
But in the latin alphabet, JavaScript begins with an I!
pipeline_peak 114 days ago [-]
>GraalVM is far from a canonical JavaScript implementation; engines like V8, JavaScriptCore, and SpiderMonkey hold that role.
>you must dig into the documentation to find its support.
Okay but it’s in the documentation which ruins your whole “abandonment” argument.
Even still, they clearly have their own use of JavaScript, albeit not “canonical”, whatever the author meant by that bitter refutal.
vips7L 113 days ago [-]
I don’t really understand the argument either. GraalJS is an implementation of ES2023 with additional features from graal on top.
Just because its implementation wasn’t originally for a web browser makes it not “canonical”?
__MatrixMan__ 114 days ago [-]
Maybe it's time to stop caring about such things entirely.
criticalfault 114 days ago [-]
> JavaScript is the world’s most popular programming language
Is this really so?
I have the feeling this is 'popular' because there are no alternatives. Web is popular, this is just an accompanying disaster.
There was an argument about fragmentation so people didn't want more things as option. As an answer to that there were many (?) attempts to solve problems that come with JavaScript for years, anybody remember coffee script? The only one that worked is typescript. And typescript again transpiles to Javascript having worse performance and a bunch of limitations.
The only alternative that I saw that makes sense is dart and people crucified google for considering to include it in chromium. It is really a shame that this didn't get accepted.
the_mitsuhiko 114 days ago [-]
> Is this really so? […] I have the feeling this is 'popular' because there are no alternatives
I think it's pretty clear that JavaScript is the most popular one. And yes, it's popular because in it's space it's without alternatives. But so was C for many environments. We can judge if that's fair or unfair, but it does not change the situation we have.
criticalfault 114 days ago [-]
Maybe it's about the definition of the word 'popular'.
Dictionary.com:
1. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general
2. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by an acquaintance or acquaintances:
3. of, relating to, or representing the people, especially the common people:
4. of the people as a whole, especially of all citizens of a nation or state qualified to participate in an election:
5. prevailing among the people generally:
6. suited to or intended for the general masses of people:
7. adapted to the ordinary intelligence or taste:
8. suited to the means of ordinary people; not expensive:
I have always associated popular with definition 1. Let me ask differently: do people really like JavaScript or they like web and JavaScript is forced upon them since there are no alternatives (and they actually dislike/hate it)?
johannes1234321 114 days ago [-]
Well, there are alternatives. Many people user TypeScript (which then is compiled to JavaScript) or some other alternative. JavaScript is just a compiler artifact format.
TeaVMFan 114 days ago [-]
With TeaVM you can compile Java to JavaScript and run it in the browser again. We've come full circle. https://teavm.org/
williamstein 114 days ago [-]
In the GitHub [1] and TIOBE [2] language stats, Javascript is NOT the most popular language.
> The only alternative that I saw that makes sense is dart
I do not think Dart was much of an improvement
When the tooling improves WASM is
exabrial 114 days ago [-]
^ This.
Popular, but terrible.
114 days ago [-]
RexFactorem 108 days ago [-]
[dead]
114 days ago [-]
tambourine_man 114 days ago [-]
[flagged]
austin-cheney 114 days ago [-]
JavaScript is just a name. The current language's official name, according to the specification defining that language, is ECMAScript. If the trademark is a problem then simply call it by a different name.
jandrese 114 days ago [-]
Nobody likes "ECMAScript". What a dog's breakfast of a name. Is Webscript already taken? If not I vote for that. I guess those node weirdos who want to write commandline programs using it might complain, but I think we can afford to lose them.
austin-cheney 114 days ago [-]
Call it whatever you want. The name you pick is an irrelevant aside. That is why Microsoft used to call it JScript, because the name doesn't matter as long as its not that one protected name.
linhns 114 days ago [-]
People will keep calling it JavaScript as it’s easier to say
gorkish 114 days ago [-]
The language was originally called Mocha, and when it first released to the public in Netscape it was called LiveScript. I recall that changing the name to JavaScript was quite controversial and unpopular at the time among geeks.
So when the geeks got to finally put the open standard out there they had a chance to fix this nonsense and take back the name! And they chose ECMAScript! .... wait they chose WHAT?!?
lucacasonato 114 days ago [-]
You clearly have not read the post :D
austin-cheney 114 days ago [-]
If you mean:
Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript and a co-signatory of this letter, wrote in 2006 that “ECMAScript was always an unwanted trade name that sounds like a skin disease.”
Then this is not a matter of trademark or identity. It is only a matter of marketing. If this is just a matter of trademark my comment remains equally valid. Just use a different name.
hyperpape 114 days ago [-]
"Why should I change? He's the one who sucks."
Oracle gets no real benefit from the trademark, and getting everyone to stop calling it JavaScript is basically impossible. It would be better for everyone for Oracle to just abandon the trademark.
I don't expect Oracle to actively release the trademark, but it would be better if they did.
austin-cheney 114 days ago [-]
Don't worry about other people. Just worry about yourself. It is either your problem or it isn't a problem at all.
genter 114 days ago [-]
How many books and blog posts with "JavsScript" in the title are there? Several quadrillion is my guess.
Rendered at 20:23:50 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
Better yet, though: don't call it JavaScript—call it JS. "JavaScript" is and always was a dumb name. "JS" is not only fine, but better—and not because "JS" is particularly good, but because "JavaScript" itself isn't exactly hard to beat.
The only thing left to do is for the spec authors (which includes signatories to this petition) and the rest of TC-39 to say so; the next edition of ECMA-262 should modify the existing disclaimer in the preface about "JavaScript" being an Oracle trademark to state unequivocally that "JavaScript"—an unfortunate vestige of an ill-considered marketing decision in the 1900s—is a deprecated way to refer to the language not otherwise terribly well-known as ECMAScript and that the recommended way to refer to it is simply as "JS".
There is nothing worse about "JS" over "JavaScript".
(Whereas the reverse is not true—there is something worse about "JavaScript" over "JS". Several somethings.)
What would be really cool is if the community could just rally around the original name, LiveScript… it never had anything to do with Java, let that go…
as agumonkey implicitly points out in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41559110, though, 'java' is the name of the world's most popular island. i wonder if the indonesian government could be persuaded to support the trademark revocation
— Brian Cantrill on Larry Ellison, USENIX 2011
EUIPO "[Iceland Supermarket] cannot reasonably trademark the name of a country that has been around since the 9th century".
> Mr Walker and other high-level executives from Iceland (the supermarket), took an emergency delegation to Iceland (the country), where they were met with a cold shoulder.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-13/iceland-country-secur...
But anyway, no need to be snide.
And they'll hold on to that tightly.
The most manifest example of this is simply what they made the Eclipse org jump through when they dropped, now, "Jakarta" EE. That was not a small rock in the Java pond at the time when we had to go through the Great Renaming.
But they did it anyway because the packages used to be named "javax", and Oracle was not going to let that go.
Haha. It still hasn't ended actually.
Slowly all the old software that supported only java ee are now (nearing) EOL.
Only recently I've seen teams planning and preparing for the "move".
For those unfamiliar. Worth a watch.
He abstains from alcohol and drugs, maybe?
VELCRO(r) has this song about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRi8LptvFZY
Edit: as I watched the video again I finally caught on the fact that RollerBlades are a brand of inline-skates. In Belgium we called them inline-skates.
It's interesting to see how brands-as-identifiers change based on language and countries. My Walloon friend calls tape Scotch, but I don't.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_generici...
“Aspirin”, “elevators”, “laundromat” are just a few examples.
Even “App Store” was trademarked (by Apple).
I remember McDonald's used[?] to have "All Beef" as a trademark for their burger patties (I also recall them getting in trouble in NZ as just because they're "All Beef" brand doesn't mean you can advertise them as "All Beef Patties" in a way that is clearly intended to imply they're "all beef")
https://www.wired.com/story/apple-vs-apples-trademark-battle...
One of those situations where the law can be on your side but the real problem is if you can afford the legal battle.
Some countries, the trademarks are market sector specific, but in other places cover all use cases for the name/mark.
It is highly recommended to trademark commercial products/names in each country of import. Otherwise your company could end up getting sued/imports-seized by an opportunistic a*hole that does nothing except sneak copyright/trademark rights.
Oracle is smart, and will sit on the IP like any business person should.
Most people that complain about trademarks/copyright have never been ripped off for a few hundred thousand by import/customs rules, or had counterfeit products show up for warranty repairs/returns.
IP is messy for sure, but it is better to negotiate from a position of legal power asymmetry when dealing with unreasonable individuals. Some people are crazy... had a few cons harassing one of the engineers a long time back, and needed legal to politely "ask" them to find another hobby. =3
That's why we need to file a petition with the US Patent and Trademark office.
There's a link to the non-Oracle page for node.js download, and to Oracle Javascript Extension Toolkit. Weak, but arguable.
[1] https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn75026640&docI...
> Sincerely,
> Ryan Dahl - creator of Node.js
> Brendan Eich - creator of JavaScript
> Michael Ficarra - editor of the JavaScript spec
> Rich Harris - creator of Svelte
> Isaac Z. Schlueter - creator of npm
> Feross Aboukhadijeh - CEO of Socket
> James M Snell - member of Node.js TSC
> Wes Bos - host of Syntax.fm
> Scott Tolinski - host of Syntax.fm
> and 191 more members of the JavaScript community
In what way? I don't see any immediate benefits.
It's a bit similar to when people still call TLS "SSL" but that is for very different reasons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript#Creation_at_Netscap...
I have definitely run into people who say things like “they wrote a Java script”, which actually turned out to be a Java program.
If anything to break with the old (IE6 and similar) javascripts that are still there, running somewhere.
Curious, but in what way? Java still drive lots of enterprise and banks, and I cant' say I've seen any Node.js in the backend at any of these places.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/793628/worldwide-develop...
I also wonder how they count multi users, I can easily mark 10 of those if not more.
> HTML/CSS were the most commonly used programming languages
I am sorry but that can't be taken seriously, then I know a ton of Excel developers, and wait till I get to Powerpoint ones.
I do not mean the trademark
All jokes aside though, they don’t care, and frankly speaking, despite how much sense it makes for them to release the trademark, they have no reason to care.
To seriously move the needle on this issue, you need deep pockets and lawyers.
sun microsystems - sun -> lava
java volcano -> lava
>you must dig into the documentation to find its support.
Okay but it’s in the documentation which ruins your whole “abandonment” argument.
Even still, they clearly have their own use of JavaScript, albeit not “canonical”, whatever the author meant by that bitter refutal.
Just because its implementation wasn’t originally for a web browser makes it not “canonical”?
Is this really so?
I have the feeling this is 'popular' because there are no alternatives. Web is popular, this is just an accompanying disaster.
There was an argument about fragmentation so people didn't want more things as option. As an answer to that there were many (?) attempts to solve problems that come with JavaScript for years, anybody remember coffee script? The only one that worked is typescript. And typescript again transpiles to Javascript having worse performance and a bunch of limitations.
The only alternative that I saw that makes sense is dart and people crucified google for considering to include it in chromium. It is really a shame that this didn't get accepted.
I think it's pretty clear that JavaScript is the most popular one. And yes, it's popular because in it's space it's without alternatives. But so was C for many environments. We can judge if that's fair or unfair, but it does not change the situation we have.
Dictionary.com:
1. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general
2. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by an acquaintance or acquaintances:
3. of, relating to, or representing the people, especially the common people:
4. of the people as a whole, especially of all citizens of a nation or state qualified to participate in an election:
5. prevailing among the people generally:
6. suited to or intended for the general masses of people:
7. adapted to the ordinary intelligence or taste:
8. suited to the means of ordinary people; not expensive:
I have always associated popular with definition 1. Let me ask differently: do people really like JavaScript or they like web and JavaScript is forced upon them since there are no alternatives (and they actually dislike/hate it)?
[1] https://madnight.github.io/githut/#/pull_requests/2024/1
[2] https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/
2. https://innovationgraph.github.com/global-metrics/programmin...
I do not think Dart was much of an improvement
When the tooling improves WASM is
Popular, but terrible.
So when the geeks got to finally put the open standard out there they had a chance to fix this nonsense and take back the name! And they chose ECMAScript! .... wait they chose WHAT?!?
Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript and a co-signatory of this letter, wrote in 2006 that “ECMAScript was always an unwanted trade name that sounds like a skin disease.”
Then this is not a matter of trademark or identity. It is only a matter of marketing. If this is just a matter of trademark my comment remains equally valid. Just use a different name.
Oracle gets no real benefit from the trademark, and getting everyone to stop calling it JavaScript is basically impossible. It would be better for everyone for Oracle to just abandon the trademark.
I don't expect Oracle to actively release the trademark, but it would be better if they did.