6 ms·

Note that this company in the past attempted to trademark WebAssembly [^1]. Maybe their product is still solid despite this, but I can't help but distrust the i

Note that this company in the past attempted to trademark WebAssembly [^1]. Maybe their product is still solid despite this, but I can't help but distrust the intentions of their upper leadership. [^1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30758651 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30758651

synergy20 4y ago
Thanks for the info, that's unbelievable to even have that odd idea.
krapp 4y ago
Their product is open source and MIT licensed, so their intentions shouldn't be relevant.
- lumost 4y ago
  Ultimately their intention does matter, even open source projects tend to die once the financial interest in their success is gone. Most open source libraries you interact with are created in the course of building apps internally at a company, created by consultants and free lancers to support their consulting work, or are created as monetizable products in their own right. Software is a hard and complex thing to build, people don't tend to work full-time on projects which they can't earn a living from.
  - hunterb123 4y ago
    > Ultimately their intention does matter, even open source projects tend to die once the financial interest in their success is gone. > Software is a hard and complex thing to build, people don't tend to work full-time on projects which they can't earn a living from. Wouldn't these be positive points towards how Wasmer is running the company? They are trying to keep their open source product alive by marketing and finding a way to build revenue, to continue to fund development. In the end, if they fail, it's all open source, someone can fork and continue it if the demand is there. Until then, they are the ones doing it, and doing it well imo.
    - croes 4y ago
      If they fail the IP is bought by a parent troll and everybody is sued using the term WebAssembly.
- croes 4y ago
  Who cares about the license of their products if you get sued for using the word WebAssembly
  - krapp 4y ago
    I mean, they lost the case, they're not going to be able to successfully sue anyone for using the word WebAssembly, which they could have done regardless of whether or not they trademarked it, so that's a moot point. Nevertheless, people seem to have no problems forking Firefox and not literally calling it Firefox. Other open source companies own trademarks, and no one is implicitly suspicious of their motives. In the darkest of timelines when Wasmer owns a trademark over the word WebAssembly just use another word in your brand. It seems like people are specifically interested in spreading FUD about Wasmer and I can't see the justification for it.
    - afiori 4y ago
      filing to trademark the name of technology invented by someone else is still a dick move. It is as if Nodejs tried to trademark V8
      - krapp 4y ago
        Sure, but as dick moves by software projects go, it's far from the dickest.
        makapuf 4y ago
        As dick moves go, software projects are far from the dickest. But you cannot excuse a bad move by considering there is something worse somewhere.
        croes 4y ago
        Dick move is dick move.
        afiori 4y ago
        So what?
ignoramous 4y ago
This has been discussed to death here and elsewhere. It isn't like wasmer doesn't have credible competition from companies well-funded than them, way bigger in size. I'd wish folks focused on the incredible amount of engineering that has gone into wasmer. The breadth of its offering is astonishing for a team of its size. Sad that the engineering team couldn't be together for longer, but the runtime is impressive nevertheless. I look at wasmer's various OSS repos from time to time to understand how it was put together. It has been very rewarding to say the least. (yes, I am also aware of the fallout between Syrus, the founder, and a few ex wasmer engs, but let's also focus on the good parts too, folks!)
- lofatdairy 4y ago
  Right, by no means do I want to disparage the product (which is open source anyways) nor derail the conversation. I just think it's important to bring up since this post is just the company's landing, which would obviously be positive about the product and company, especially in case someone missed those discussions. Right now I don't see any paid offerings, but things like attempts to hijack an entire language would hopefully come into consideration before paying them. That said, trademarking WebAssembly seems to spit in the face of the engineering and technical design work that went into WebAssembly before even Wasmer arrived. Perhaps not as sleek and polished as a VC-backed startup, but we can praise Wasmer for what it has accomplished while also expressing reservations regarding the people who stand to profit from its success.
- pipeline_peak 4y ago
  > but let's also focus on the good parts too, folks No, as many readers possible should be informed. This no name startup attempted to steal what was supposed to be a standard runtime format. Imagine what they’d do on a larger scale with that sort of behavior. That’s not a company that deserves to grow, we have enough Google’s and Apple’s. A lot of these companies play good guy by open sourcing their products. Given this one’s commercial struggle, who says they genuinely want the world to see their code, Is it not possible they have no other choice? An open source, closed spec product doesn’t really add up, it’s ingenuine, greedy, and downright stagnant.
MR4D 4y ago
Given all the other trademarks in open source [1], can you tell me why this is even relevant? [1] -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trademarked_open-source_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trademarked_open-sourc...
- echelon 4y ago
  These trademarks appear to be owned by the body that created the software in question. Web assembly isn't just Wasmer. This move is like trying to trademark "internet" or "hyperlink" or "metaverse".
- lofatdairy 4y ago
  Typically the trademarks are held by the collation/organization behind the OSS or the open standard. Either that, or held by the person/org who created the software and released it. Here, wasmer is not the inventor of WebAssembly, and the group behind webassembly (the w3c community group and w3c working group) [^1] probably would be the ones you'd expect to own the trademark. It seems part of the motivation for Wasmer to apply for the trademark was because they felt snubbed by the Bytecode alliance [^2] and wanted to start their own foundation (with blackjack and hookers, presumably). The Bytecode alliance doesn't own any of the trademarks either, and seems to be more of a collaborative effort, but is worth mentioning as part of the overall story. [^1]: Groups listed here: https://webassembly.org/ https://webassembly.org/. and members here: https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List and https://www.w3.org/community/webassembly/participants https://www.w3.org/community/webassembly/participants. Note that a few Wasmer employees (the CEO, for one) belong to the community group, but don't chair it. [^2]: https://bytecodealliance.org/ https://bytecodealliance.org/ and https://wasmer.io/posts/wasmer-and-trademarks https://wasmer.io/posts/wasmer-and-trademarks
apineda 4y ago
Thanks for bringing this up. It's important not to easily forget (even if some may forgive) and that's what a community is for.

synergy20 4y ago

Thanks for the info, that's unbelievable to even have that odd idea.

krapp 4y ago

Their product is open source and MIT licensed, so their intentions shouldn't be relevant.

lumost 4y ago
Ultimately their intention does matter, even open source projects tend to die once the financial interest in their success is gone. Most open source libraries you interact with are created in the course of building apps internally at a company, created by consultants and free lancers to support their consulting work, or are created as monetizable products in their own right. Software is a hard and complex thing to build, people don't tend to work full-time on projects which they can't earn a living from.
- hunterb123 4y ago
  > Ultimately their intention does matter, even open source projects tend to die once the financial interest in their success is gone. > Software is a hard and complex thing to build, people don't tend to work full-time on projects which they can't earn a living from. Wouldn't these be positive points towards how Wasmer is running the company? They are trying to keep their open source product alive by marketing and finding a way to build revenue, to continue to fund development. In the end, if they fail, it's all open source, someone can fork and continue it if the demand is there. Until then, they are the ones doing it, and doing it well imo.
  - croes 4y ago
    If they fail the IP is bought by a parent troll and everybody is sued using the term WebAssembly.
croes 4y ago
Who cares about the license of their products if you get sued for using the word WebAssembly
- krapp 4y ago
  I mean, they lost the case, they're not going to be able to successfully sue anyone for using the word WebAssembly, which they could have done regardless of whether or not they trademarked it, so that's a moot point. Nevertheless, people seem to have no problems forking Firefox and not literally calling it Firefox. Other open source companies own trademarks, and no one is implicitly suspicious of their motives. In the darkest of timelines when Wasmer owns a trademark over the word WebAssembly just use another word in your brand. It seems like people are specifically interested in spreading FUD about Wasmer and I can't see the justification for it.
  - afiori 4y ago
    filing to trademark the name of technology invented by someone else is still a dick move. It is as if Nodejs tried to trademark V8
    - krapp 4y ago
      Sure, but as dick moves by software projects go, it's far from the dickest.
      - makapuf 4y ago
        As dick moves go, software projects are far from the dickest. But you cannot excuse a bad move by considering there is something worse somewhere.
      - croes 4y ago
        Dick move is dick move.
      - afiori 4y ago
        So what?

ignoramous 4y ago

This has been discussed to death here and elsewhere. It isn't like wasmer doesn't have credible competition from companies well-funded than them, way bigger in size. I'd wish folks focused on the incredible amount of engineering that has gone into wasmer. The breadth of its offering is astonishing for a team of its size. Sad that the engineering team couldn't be together for longer, but the runtime is impressive nevertheless. I look at wasmer's various OSS repos from time to time to understand how it was put together. It has been very rewarding to say the least. (yes, I am also aware of the fallout between Syrus, the founder, and a few ex wasmer engs, but let's also focus on the good parts too, folks!)

lofatdairy 4y ago
Right, by no means do I want to disparage the product (which is open source anyways) nor derail the conversation. I just think it's important to bring up since this post is just the company's landing, which would obviously be positive about the product and company, especially in case someone missed those discussions. Right now I don't see any paid offerings, but things like attempts to hijack an entire language would hopefully come into consideration before paying them. That said, trademarking WebAssembly seems to spit in the face of the engineering and technical design work that went into WebAssembly before even Wasmer arrived. Perhaps not as sleek and polished as a VC-backed startup, but we can praise Wasmer for what it has accomplished while also expressing reservations regarding the people who stand to profit from its success.
pipeline_peak 4y ago
> but let's also focus on the good parts too, folks No, as many readers possible should be informed. This no name startup attempted to steal what was supposed to be a standard runtime format. Imagine what they’d do on a larger scale with that sort of behavior. That’s not a company that deserves to grow, we have enough Google’s and Apple’s. A lot of these companies play good guy by open sourcing their products. Given this one’s commercial struggle, who says they genuinely want the world to see their code, Is it not possible they have no other choice? An open source, closed spec product doesn’t really add up, it’s ingenuine, greedy, and downright stagnant.

MR4D 4y ago

Given all the other trademarks in open source [1], can you tell me why this is even relevant? [1] -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trademarked_open-source_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trademarked_open-sourc...

echelon 4y ago
These trademarks appear to be owned by the body that created the software in question. Web assembly isn't just Wasmer. This move is like trying to trademark "internet" or "hyperlink" or "metaverse".
lofatdairy 4y ago
Typically the trademarks are held by the collation/organization behind the OSS or the open standard. Either that, or held by the person/org who created the software and released it. Here, wasmer is not the inventor of WebAssembly, and the group behind webassembly (the w3c community group and w3c working group) [^1] probably would be the ones you'd expect to own the trademark. It seems part of the motivation for Wasmer to apply for the trademark was because they felt snubbed by the Bytecode alliance [^2] and wanted to start their own foundation (with blackjack and hookers, presumably). The Bytecode alliance doesn't own any of the trademarks either, and seems to be more of a collaborative effort, but is worth mentioning as part of the overall story. [^1]: Groups listed here: https://webassembly.org/ https://webassembly.org/. and members here: https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List and https://www.w3.org/community/webassembly/participants https://www.w3.org/community/webassembly/participants. Note that a few Wasmer employees (the CEO, for one) belong to the community group, but don't chair it. [^2]: https://bytecodealliance.org/ https://bytecodealliance.org/ and https://wasmer.io/posts/wasmer-and-trademarks https://wasmer.io/posts/wasmer-and-trademarks

apineda 4y ago

Thanks for bringing this up. It's important not to easily forget (even if some may forgive) and that's what a community is for.