18 ms·

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

631 points by healsdata 2y ago

LorenDB 2y ago
The best part of this article for me was seeing that Oracle's screenshots were taken in IE. Yes, those are old by now, but it's still a blast from the past.
- xmprt 2y ago
  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 I didn't even know IE still existed at the time - I thought it had been replaced by Edge.
  - jsheard 2y ago
    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.
    - MiddleEndian 2y ago
      >Microsoft support lifecycles are no joke. Except for Mail and Calendar that they randomly decided to murder and replace with some Outlook webapp garbage.
      - jsheard 2y ago
        They'll support anything nearly forever if that's what their big support contracts want, but unfortunately their interests won't always align with yours...
        MiddleEndian 2y ago
        Yeah of course haha just ranting
      - wongarsu 2y ago
        For business plans the old Outlook is still supported until "at least 2029" [1]. That's four more years to switch. And Microsoft hasn't even committed to stopping support at that date, they just don't want to promise more. I fully expect them to extend it because some large customers won't have switched. What is unusual is how pushy Microsoft is in trying to get people to switch now instead of in the last second. And of course the quick murder of the consumer email thingy [1] https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/outlook/new-outlook-for-windows-a-guide-to-product-availability/4078895 https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/outlook/new-outlook...
        MiddleEndian 2y ago
        I specifically mean Windows Mail and Windows Calendar, the fairly minimalist apps, rather than Outlook, which is way too exhausting to use for my personal email and calendar. Plus the Outlook app has ads.
    - datavirtue 2y ago
      That sounds dangerous.
      - jsheard 2y ago
        The good news is that most of the web simply doesn't work in Trident at this point, so users won't be tempted to use it for anything other than the 20 year old ActiveX horror that their company refuses to replace.
    - userbinator 2y ago
      which switches the backend from Chromium to Trident, effectively turning it into IE with a modern skin I wish they'd done the opposite instead: same UI, but with a better browser engine.
      - throwaway2037 2y ago
        > better browser engine I'm confused. Are you saying Chromium or Trident browser engine is better? And, in 2025, is there a better engine than Chromium?
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        userbinator 2y ago
        IE UI, Chromium engine.
        throwaway2037 2y ago
        No trolling: Isn't that Microsoft Edge?
        3836293648 2y ago
        No? Edge still looks almost exactly like any other Chromium version?
        gkbrk 2y ago
        > And, in 2025, is there a better engine than Chromium? WebKit and Gecko are way better
      - egeozcan 2y ago
        I wish someone recreated Netscape Navigator UI with the Gecko engine. I can't give any reasons, I just wish it.
    - chasil 2y ago
      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.
- pseudosavant 2y ago
  IE11 was still 6-years old at the time of that screenshot (based on the Node versions), and 3 months from EOL on pre-Windows 10.
ndneighbor 2y ago
Knowing Oracle, they will take it to court if they can. To paraphrase Cantrill, it's a company that behaves very much like a lawnmower.
- ggm 2y ago
  If you want to personify the mistaken belief "if a company can make money legally then it is obliged in law to do it, to maximise shareholder value" thing: Oracle is that company. There is only one goal. Immediate reporting cycle uptick benefit. There is no other goal. I can think of almost no play they have made in the market which has any longterm net beneficial outcome for the entire market, despite "grow a bigger market" being a thing. We would have ZFS in a lot more places, if Oracle hadn't made a short term licence play, and muddied the waters. We used to hate on a range of companies about their IBM like qualities (market dominance, bad behaviour inside the law) but now, IBM is a pale shadow, and Oracle has taken the crown.
  - spuz 2y ago
    I wish I could agree that Oracle are somehow acting in the interest of their shareholders but I fail to see how they benefit by spending hundreds of thousands on lawyers to try to protect a trademark that makes them zero revenue and on the whole damages their brand.
    - cmgbhm 2y ago
      If they win, there’s a forever revenue stream to extract and they keep their TM law sharp.
      - thot_experiment 2y ago
        There's no revenue stream, JavaScript is the colloquial term used to refer to ECMAScript, ain't nobody paying Oracle if they started trying to enforce it.
    - wrs 2y ago
      It intimidates anyone who might want to sue them for anything else. Being widely known for your scorched earth policy can be pretty effective. (Certain "we never settle" insurance companies do this too.)
kingforaday 2y ago
Anyone else read the article and say Oracle JET? What is that?
- ikesau 2y ago
  It is literally for the best if you don't find out, to not legitimize this ridiculous argument they're making that JavaScript hasn't genericized. But because you'll be too curious to resist now, from what I can tell it's a preact bootstrapping script with 500 weekly downloads on NPM.
- davidsojevic 2y ago
  First time I'd ever heard of it too; I ran straight to Google and it only came up with results for "Breville Oracle Jet Espresso Machine" which interestingly enough Breville seem to hold a trademark on "Oracle" itself in the machines and tools class!
  - phpnode 2y ago
    https://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/jet/jetCookbook.html https://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/jet/jetCookbook...
    - ZeWaka 2y ago
      This is really neat, thanks. Their linked Visual Builder Cookbook (https://vbcookbook.oracle.com https://vbcookbook.oracle.com) also is a nice way to internally communicate design patterns.
  - bjt12345 2y ago
    I've always sat there wondering if my Breville expresso machine is running Breville JavaScript(c) inside it.
  - thayne 2y ago
    Oooh, can we convince Breville to sue Oracle for any software they make that is described as a "tool"? How about the Oracle Java Virtual Machine.
indulona 2y ago
[flagged]
rtpg 2y ago
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 nicely" is no longer what is being looked at. It's Oracle! Imagine how far along ago we would be[0] if 2 years ago the lawyers started getting involved. Sometimes you just gotta do the thing that takes forever. Or at least try in parallel? [0]: Again, I'm not paying for the lawyers or doing anything useful at all!
- LoganDark 2y ago
  > [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"
  - eviks 2y ago
    Maybe the main thing this disclaimer does is make more people aware of the quoted criticism
  - rtpg 2y ago
    The open thing is that the person doing the thing is allowed a greater say to strategy IMO.
    - cafeinux 2y ago
      > IMO Well you're not helping so you're not entitled to that opinion.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      This isn't the forum where strategic decisions are happening.
- kaycebasques 2y ago
mmastrac 2y ago
This response is just saying that "no we didn't fraudulently submit the node.js site, it's just (hand-waving)". They also state that they expect to win on the generic-ness aspect of the suit at trial with the relevant audience (hah). Most likely we'll see Oracle send out C&Ds to uses of Javascript without the (tm) Oracle for a few months before a trial starts. Whether that will be enough to convince a judge and/or jury that they haven't abandoned the trademark is another question.
- barnabee 2y ago
  Man, they ought to lose Java on generic-ness, let alone JavaScript. Java was invented by Sun and literally nobody cares (nor is particularly happy) that Oracle currently makes a version of the JDK. JavaScript is made by almost everyone in tech except Oracle. If the courts don’t strike down this trademark it’ll be nothing but blatant corporatism.
  - vips7L 2y ago
    > Java was invented by Sun and literally nobody cares (nor is particularly happy) that Oracle currently makes a version of the JDK. This is honestly an insanity level take. Oracle is the main contributor to OpenJdk. OpenJdk is the most widely used implementation of Java and Java is in the top 3 most used programming languages in the world. Thousands of developers and companies make their livelihoods off of Oracle and OpenJdk. Oracle has been a better steward of Java than Sun ever was. Sun let Java languish as they did not have the money to keep developing it and to keep it relevant. Without Oracle Java would have never gotten past version 6 and let’s not forget Oracle was the one to completely open source OpenJdk under the GPL.
    - crote 2y ago
      > let’s not forget Oracle was the one to completely open source OpenJdk under the GPL Technically true, but isn't that a bit misleading? The open-sourcing started years before Oracle's acquisition of Sun, and by the time Oracle got their hands on it the process was essentially finished - except for a single optional library. Oracle wasn't the driving force behind the open-sourcing, and I doubt they would have even been able to stop the process - let alone reverse it - if they wanted to.
29athrowaway 2y ago
Just call it ECMAScript and forget about "Java". "JavaScript" was not a good choice of name to begin with. The original JavaScript did not have much in common with Java.
- steve_adams_86 2y ago
  Brendan Eich said "ECMAScript was always an unwanted trade name that sounds like a skin disease". I think the general sentiment is shared fairly broadly.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - 29athrowaway 2y ago
    When JavaScript was created, Java was a trademark of Sun Microsystems. Then Oracle acquired Sun, and with it, the trademark to Java. And then this crap started. That was the moment to drop "Java" from the name, everyone knows exactly why.
    - tomxor 2y ago
      The issue is not with the "Java" trademark (also owned by Oracle), but the "JavaScript" trademark, which was issued to Sun in 1997. JavaScript was released in 1996... and not at Sun. i.e the Language and name both pre-date the trademark.
      - wslh 2y ago
        I'm not a lawyer, but I have a few trademarks myself, and I believe it's possible to apply for a trademark even if the language or term predates it. However, if there's a significant gap between the language's release and the trademark application, that could raise other questions. For example, if JavaScript was created in the '70s but Oracle applied for the trademark in the late '90s, when the language became popular, that could be a more complicated case. In this instance, though, there's only a one-year difference! It's quite common for businesses to file for trademarks after they see value in protecting a term. By the way, when I filed my first trademark application, Sun Microsystems filed an opposition. What a coincidence! This was before Oracle acquired them.
profsummergig 2y ago
I've always been fascinated by Larry Ellison ever since I read his biography (God something something). What's insane is how much of the culture he controls. In tech and outside. He's about to own the largest entertainment company, he owns some of the best real estate in the world, and he owns MySQL and Java. Genius (or maybe evil genius).
- psunavy03 2y ago
  There's a reason the joke is that "Oracle" stands for One Rich Asshole Called Larry Ellison.
  - profsummergig 2y ago
    The crazy thing is that ORACLE was a CIA program that Larry got a contract for. He named his company after it. A genius aspect of Larry is that, like Steve Jobs (his best friend), he knew how to milk a gifted 50x programmer. There was a co-founder who did all the heavy code writing, while Larry did the schmoozing (not an unimportant job).
- pjmorris 2y ago
  'The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison[0]', Mike Wilson. It's a worthwhile read, and I think the joke is funny. [0] - God doesn't think he's Larry Ellison
- qingcharles 2y ago
  And he's pretty well installed in the White House this term too, especially with his role in Stargate and TikTok.
ryao 2y ago
Calling EMCAScript JavaScript was a huge mistake that is still biting us.
- stephen_g 2y ago
  OR alternatively, just not coming up with a better alternative name that ECMAScript. If there was a catchier alternative name that was less awkward to pronounce, people might more happily have switched over.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - westurner 2y ago
    "JS" because of the .js file extension. ECMAScript version history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript_version_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript_version_history "Java" is an island in Indonesia associated with coffee beans from the Dutch East Indies that Sun Microsystems named their portable software after. Coffee production in Indonesia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_production_in_Indonesia#Java https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_production_in_Indonesia... : > Certain estates age a portion of their coffee for up to five years, normally in large burlap sacks, which are regularly aired, dusted, and flipped.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - ryao 2y ago
    Here is a novel idea. Just pronounce ECMA as a 2 syllable word using classical Latin pronunciation. Ecma becomes just as catchy as Java when pronounced that way. For English speakers who do not know classical Latin, just read this: Eck-Ma-Script Here is Eck for those who do not know: https://youtu.be/cqsDlZAK104 https://youtu.be/cqsDlZAK104 As for Ma, it is the second half of mama. That is actually /ɛkmɑskɹɪpt/ rather than /ekmaskɹɪpt/, but it is close enough.
    - 2y ago
jollofricepeas 2y ago
Maybe I’m missing something… I get it that Oracle is in the wrong but I’m still not sure why get in this trademark fight anyhow. I would personally leave it to someone with much larger pockets like Microsoft to deal with.
- blmarket 2y ago
  Oracle will fight like hell if there is a slightest chance to earn royalty from that trademark. edit: Microsoft or other companies have no financial benefit on that fight. Even Deno itself has no financial benefit as well. This fight is for goodwill but not justifiable for financial terms (unless you can be the next owner of JavaScript trademark)
- morgannewman 2y ago
  Well, it appears nobody else has taken the lead on this since 1997 so…
matt3210 2y ago
Lawyers on staff with nothing to do ATM…
toddmorey 2y ago
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.
- Etheryte 2y ago
  We could also rebrand it as Js and it would be the funniest thing ever. Few things would make me happier than seeing Oracle being screwed by something that's technically correct, but clearly nonsense to every living human being.
  - scripturial 2y ago
    The only reason it hasn’t had a name change is oracle hasn’t tried to protect the name. There needs to be a campaign to change the name.
  - jonny_eh 2y ago
    I saw someone recommend the JS rebrand years ago, so I just started using it. Everyone knows what I mean when I mention "JS", I never have to explain.
  - giorgioz 2y ago
    Yes this seems to have become the best practice with all the JS Conf events and the logo showing JS. But frankly Oracle has always been a jerk and had miopic vision in things like this. I'm happy if someone also fights them on being a mindless jerk. They sued Google over Android using Java which was literally the best thing ever for Java. Java got learned by a whole new generation of developers (myself among those). Google at the time was also publishing the GWT Google Web Toolkit. Oracle would rather own a tombstone with written Java and JavaScript on it rather than set them free and find some other indirect ways to monetize. "If you love something, set them free" doesn't apply to Oracle, whose policies seem to show they have little love for development and software itself.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
culi 2y ago
> So last November, I filed a formal petition with the USPTO through my company, Deno, to cancel Oracle’s “JavaScript” trademark. Among other things, we pointed out that in 2019, Oracle renewed its trademark by submitting a screenshot of the Node.js website—a project I created—as proof of use, despite having no affiliation with it. Clown world. We go about thinking our legal system might have some flaws but generally "works"
floydnoel 2y ago
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?
- t0ps0il 2y ago
  > 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EdgeHTML
  - floydnoel 2y ago
    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.
- not_a_bot_4sho 2y ago
  > Isn't MS's browser just Chromium? No. It's based on Chromium. It has quite a bit on functionally that's not available on Chrome or Chromium.
  - floydnoel 2y ago
    for the purposes of this discussion, irrelevant. we are talking about JS implementations. extra bookmarking features or copilot slop isn't a factor.
- stevefan1999 2y ago
  Well, at least I can still install ublock origin on Edge, but I can't do that on Vanilla Chromium (yep, that manifest v3 thing is enabled by default for Chromium in Google's flavor)
- GoblinSlayer 2y ago
sayrer 2y ago
They are using the wrong tactics. They should use the "Kleenex" argument and say it's generic. But what do I know.
- svieira 2y ago
  They're doing both - the issue is that the fraud issue either gets dropped (which Ryan doesn't want to do) or it blocks the second "generic" issue until resolved. > Oracle waited until the deadline to file this motion, delaying their response to the real issue: whether “JavaScript” is a generic term. and > Oracle won’t even discuss whether “JavaScript” should remain a trademark until they’ve finished dragging out this fraud claim. > This legal maneuvering puts us in a difficult position: > 1. Agree to drop the fraud claim, letting them get away with misrepresenting their trademark renewal. > 2. Spend months fighting this procedural issue before even getting to the real debate.
- aardvarkr 2y ago
  But they are… genericness is a key part of their argument. >Our petition challenges Oracle’s trademark on three grounds: >Genericness – JavaScript is a widely used programming language, not an Oracle product. >Abandonment – Oracle does not control, maintain, or enforce the trademark. >Fraud on the USPTO – Oracle submitted misleading evidence in its renewal filing.
krashidov 2y ago
I hope this is good marketing for Deno and not just a huge distraction. I feel like Bun is running circles around them right now. I feel like there might even be room for 3 winners (Bun, Deno, Node) but I don't understand the point of this. If Deno wins this battle will that make we want use Deno more?
- bsimpson 2y ago
  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.
  - krashidov 2y ago
    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
    - crabmusket 2y ago
      > the most I hear from Deno is this lawsui Two days ago: https://deno.com/blog/jsr-open-governance-board 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.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - krashidov 2y ago
        > 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. Are they trying to build different things? I feel like they're direct competitors. Are you a Deno user? Curious what your experience has been
xiphias2 2y ago
Is ,,Oracle not controlling JavaScript'' really a good argument? Who wants Oracle to start controlling it? We're mostly better off leaving it a gray area maybe until Oracle gets more aggressive with it.
- nhumrich 2y ago
  Yes because in trademark lawsuits, proving a brand doesn't actually use it/control it, is a very common way for them to lose the trademark.
_7acn 2y ago
Just under 30 years ago, when I was starting my IT studies, I had an older colleague who was a great authority to me. When I began learning about RDBMS options, I called him to ask, „What do you think about Oracle?”. He just shouted, „Total crap!!!” and that was enough for me. Since then, to this day, I’ve never touched Oracle.
- tw04 2y ago
  I don't think it's necessarily fair to say Oracle is total crap. For decades they were more performant and had more features than most anything else on the market. They supported scale-out clustering on linux with Oracle RAC. They were early adopters of high performance NFS moving the NFS stack out of the linux kernel and directly into the database with DirectNFS. They built a clustered filesystem for block-based clusters (OCFS). HOWEVER, the way they run their business is horrible. Oracle the product was various versions of awesome to just OK. Oracle the business is a modern-day mafioso shakedown.
  - rizky05 2y ago
    [dead]
  - duxup 2y ago
    Yeah every argument about Oracle being bad is business related, not tech.
    - SeanAnderson 2y ago
      Mmm, one of the most memorable stories I've ever read on HN is about Oracle being bad at tech. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18442941 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18442941
      - duxup 2y ago
        I remember that one!
zoom6628 2y ago
To avoid "trade mark infringement" all the JS runtime owners could just make theirs not work on any oracle app or domain with a big annoying message about the case.
kbutler 2y ago
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.
jongjong 2y ago
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?
- boblauer 2y ago
  To answer your question, it's to give the appearance of fairness. It's the same reason Russia holds elections.
2d8a875f-39a2-4 2y ago
Imagine you start a new OSS RDBMS project. To help drive adoption you license a trademark from Oracle and call it "OracleBase", even though it has nothing much in common with the well known Oracle database other than also being an RDBMS. Despite not being objectively better than competitors OracleBase is wildly successful and basically takes over the OSS RDBMS space. Multiple other projects and vendors are building on your specs. A popular and extensive ecosystem develops around it. Many peoples careers are invested in its growth and success. One day you wake up in a cold sweat, suddenly remembering that the old trademark you licensed years ago is still there, pointed at your cathedral like a nuclear missile, with Larry Ellison's finger on the trigger.
- jonny_eh 2y ago
  It's good that Oracle doesn't own the trademark to SQL.
- 0x7cfe 2y ago
  Honestly, I don't feel that the name is _that_ important for a project of such scale and popularity. I mean, if they'd just rebrand JavaScript as JS, no one would probably notice. Many devs already call it like that, and probably not a single soul feels JS connection to Java anymore (not to mention, it wasn't there in the first place, but oh well). Even bigger companies do rebranding sometimes.
bmacho 2y ago
> A company with no role in JavaScript’s past or future has no right to control its name. I like this, as a simple yet powerful slogen!
aqueueaqueue 2y ago
Deno is kind if a competitor to Oracle, so bear that in mind. Using deno? You ain't using Java then.
_old_dude_ 2y ago
I'm sympathetic to the points being made but the argument that Oracle does not have its own JavaScript runtime does not hold. An OracleBD is able to execute triggers written in JavaScript since quite some time. see https://blogs.oracle.com/java/post/multilingual-engine-executing-javascript-in-oracle%C2%A0database https://blogs.oracle.com/java/post/multilingual-engine-execu...
- vips7L 2y ago
  There is also the nashorn JavaScript engine and graaljs.
- Narretz 2y ago
  I don't think the article outright claims Oracle has no JavaScript runtime, only that Oracle JET is no runtime, which is true. And since this is the evidence Oracle presented to keep the trademark, it's fair to point out that this is nonsense. But it's also true that if this goes to court, Oracle could present GraalJS (which is used in OracleDB) as evidence for their case.
freetanga 2y ago
I say what I said to the last Oracle salesmen who visited me: “when your legal teams drives more revenue that your sales team, you know your company is deader than Larry Ellisons dick”
nubinetwork 2y ago
Please don't back out of this... oracle needs to be slapped down for every piece of software that they've bought (or scammed/stolen) and abused with neglect and hoarding, and trying to milk every dollar out of things they never created.
lakomen 2y ago
[flagged]
adolph 2y ago
1. Is anyone paying Oracle for this trademark? I ask because lawyers aren’t underpants gnomes; if there is not a revenue stream then what supports their effort? 2. The below quote from the article has a poignant innocence to it. Not as unhinged as Mullenwrg but still as deluded. I created Node.js and released it under the MIT license to benefit developers, not so it could be used as a legal pawn by a Fortune 500 company. Now, instead of correcting their misrepresentation, they’re using it to stall the case.
AutistiCoder 2y ago
I don't think Oracle's got a case here. They didn't really enforce the trademark.
phlosioneer 2y ago
On the fraud issue, while it's infuriating, I don't think you have standing to allege the actual issue. The issue is statement 17 of your filing is factually incorrect, as Oracle details in their motion to dismiss. The form, without that specimen, is still valid; the most the court could do is to strike that image from the record and everything else would remain unchanged. I'm not a lawyer, but from what I understand, you need standing to proceed with a claim. Standing here means that you were harmed or affected by the claim, and are seeking relief (i.e. asking the court to do/order something for you). The problem here, as Oracle points out, is that you were not harmed by the misrepresentation of the specimen. The USPTO was harmed by the misrepresentation, not you. A way around this issue would be if the USPTO delegated its authority to bring-misrepresentation-concerns to any applicant willing to pay the court costs. You'd have to check if any law delegated that authority (for judicial action), or if there's a separate form, process, or procedure used to handle the delegation (outside of judicial action). A similar example of this in action is EPA violations; for many cases, no individual has standing to bring the court action needed to address the harm being done. So the EPA was given that standing by law. Then the EPA delegates that authority as needed, or acts on its own. I think you should drop this claim and continue with the others, and look into how USPTO handles immaterial but knowingly-false information. They probably have some mechanism, so that people don't just... throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks.

631 points by healsdata 2y ago

The best part of this article for me was seeing that Oracle's screenshots were taken in IE. Yes, those are old by now, but it's still a blast from the past.

xmprt 2y ago
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.
- jsheard 2y ago
  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.
  - MiddleEndian 2y ago
    >Microsoft support lifecycles are no joke. Except for Mail and Calendar that they randomly decided to murder and replace with some Outlook webapp garbage.
    - jsheard 2y ago
      They'll support anything nearly forever if that's what their big support contracts want, but unfortunately their interests won't always align with yours...
      - MiddleEndian 2y ago
        Yeah of course haha just ranting
    - wongarsu 2y ago
      For business plans the old Outlook is still supported until "at least 2029" [1]. That's four more years to switch. And Microsoft hasn't even committed to stopping support at that date, they just don't want to promise more. I fully expect them to extend it because some large customers won't have switched. What is unusual is how pushy Microsoft is in trying to get people to switch now instead of in the last second. And of course the quick murder of the consumer email thingy [1] https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/outlook/new-outlook-for-windows-a-guide-to-product-availability/4078895 https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/outlook/new-outlook...
      - MiddleEndian 2y ago
        I specifically mean Windows Mail and Windows Calendar, the fairly minimalist apps, rather than Outlook, which is way too exhausting to use for my personal email and calendar. Plus the Outlook app has ads.
  - datavirtue 2y ago
    That sounds dangerous.
    - jsheard 2y ago
      The good news is that most of the web simply doesn't work in Trident at this point, so users won't be tempted to use it for anything other than the 20 year old ActiveX horror that their company refuses to replace.
  - userbinator 2y ago
    which switches the backend from Chromium to Trident, effectively turning it into IE with a modern skin I wish they'd done the opposite instead: same UI, but with a better browser engine.
    - throwaway2037 2y ago
      > better browser engine I'm confused. Are you saying Chromium or Trident browser engine is better? And, in 2025, is there a better engine than Chromium?
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - userbinator 2y ago
        IE UI, Chromium engine.
        throwaway2037 2y ago
        No trolling: Isn't that Microsoft Edge?
        3836293648 2y ago
        No? Edge still looks almost exactly like any other Chromium version?
      - gkbrk 2y ago
        > And, in 2025, is there a better engine than Chromium? WebKit and Gecko are way better
    - egeozcan 2y ago
      I wish someone recreated Netscape Navigator UI with the Gecko engine. I can't give any reasons, I just wish it.
  - chasil 2y ago
    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.
pseudosavant 2y ago
IE11 was still 6-years old at the time of that screenshot (based on the Node versions), and 3 months from EOL on pre-Windows 10.

ndneighbor 2y ago

Knowing Oracle, they will take it to court if they can. To paraphrase Cantrill, it's a company that behaves very much like a lawnmower.

ggm 2y ago
If you want to personify the mistaken belief "if a company can make money legally then it is obliged in law to do it, to maximise shareholder value" thing: Oracle is that company. There is only one goal. Immediate reporting cycle uptick benefit. There is no other goal. I can think of almost no play they have made in the market which has any longterm net beneficial outcome for the entire market, despite "grow a bigger market" being a thing. We would have ZFS in a lot more places, if Oracle hadn't made a short term licence play, and muddied the waters. We used to hate on a range of companies about their IBM like qualities (market dominance, bad behaviour inside the law) but now, IBM is a pale shadow, and Oracle has taken the crown.
- spuz 2y ago
  I wish I could agree that Oracle are somehow acting in the interest of their shareholders but I fail to see how they benefit by spending hundreds of thousands on lawyers to try to protect a trademark that makes them zero revenue and on the whole damages their brand.
  - cmgbhm 2y ago
    If they win, there’s a forever revenue stream to extract and they keep their TM law sharp.
    - thot_experiment 2y ago
      There's no revenue stream, JavaScript is the colloquial term used to refer to ECMAScript, ain't nobody paying Oracle if they started trying to enforce it.
  - wrs 2y ago
    It intimidates anyone who might want to sue them for anything else. Being widely known for your scorched earth policy can be pretty effective. (Certain "we never settle" insurance companies do this too.)

kingforaday 2y ago

Anyone else read the article and say Oracle JET? What is that?

ikesau 2y ago
It is literally for the best if you don't find out, to not legitimize this ridiculous argument they're making that JavaScript hasn't genericized. But because you'll be too curious to resist now, from what I can tell it's a preact bootstrapping script with 500 weekly downloads on NPM.
davidsojevic 2y ago
First time I'd ever heard of it too; I ran straight to Google and it only came up with results for "Breville Oracle Jet Espresso Machine" which interestingly enough Breville seem to hold a trademark on "Oracle" itself in the machines and tools class!
- phpnode 2y ago
  https://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/jet/jetCookbook.html https://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/jet/jetCookbook...
  - ZeWaka 2y ago
    This is really neat, thanks. Their linked Visual Builder Cookbook (https://vbcookbook.oracle.com https://vbcookbook.oracle.com) also is a nice way to internally communicate design patterns.
- bjt12345 2y ago
  I've always sat there wondering if my Breville expresso machine is running Breville JavaScript(c) inside it.
- thayne 2y ago
  Oooh, can we convince Breville to sue Oracle for any software they make that is described as a "tool"? How about the Oracle Java Virtual Machine.

indulona 2y ago

[flagged]

rtpg 2y ago

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 nicely" is no longer what is being looked at. It's Oracle! Imagine how far along ago we would be[0] if 2 years ago the lawyers started getting involved. Sometimes you just gotta do the thing that takes forever. Or at least try in parallel? [0]: Again, I'm not paying for the lawyers or doing anything useful at all!

LoganDark 2y ago
> [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"
- eviks 2y ago
  Maybe the main thing this disclaimer does is make more people aware of the quoted criticism
- rtpg 2y ago
  The open thing is that the person doing the thing is allowed a greater say to strategy IMO.
  - cafeinux 2y ago
    > IMO Well you're not helping so you're not entitled to that opinion.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    This isn't the forum where strategic decisions are happening.
kaycebasques 2y ago

mmastrac 2y ago

This response is just saying that "no we didn't fraudulently submit the node.js site, it's just (hand-waving)". They also state that they expect to win on the generic-ness aspect of the suit at trial with the relevant audience (hah). Most likely we'll see Oracle send out C&Ds to uses of Javascript without the (tm) Oracle for a few months before a trial starts. Whether that will be enough to convince a judge and/or jury that they haven't abandoned the trademark is another question.

barnabee 2y ago
Man, they ought to lose Java on generic-ness, let alone JavaScript. Java was invented by Sun and literally nobody cares (nor is particularly happy) that Oracle currently makes a version of the JDK. JavaScript is made by almost everyone in tech except Oracle. If the courts don’t strike down this trademark it’ll be nothing but blatant corporatism.
- vips7L 2y ago
  > Java was invented by Sun and literally nobody cares (nor is particularly happy) that Oracle currently makes a version of the JDK. This is honestly an insanity level take. Oracle is the main contributor to OpenJdk. OpenJdk is the most widely used implementation of Java and Java is in the top 3 most used programming languages in the world. Thousands of developers and companies make their livelihoods off of Oracle and OpenJdk. Oracle has been a better steward of Java than Sun ever was. Sun let Java languish as they did not have the money to keep developing it and to keep it relevant. Without Oracle Java would have never gotten past version 6 and let’s not forget Oracle was the one to completely open source OpenJdk under the GPL.
  - crote 2y ago
    > let’s not forget Oracle was the one to completely open source OpenJdk under the GPL Technically true, but isn't that a bit misleading? The open-sourcing started years before Oracle's acquisition of Sun, and by the time Oracle got their hands on it the process was essentially finished - except for a single optional library. Oracle wasn't the driving force behind the open-sourcing, and I doubt they would have even been able to stop the process - let alone reverse it - if they wanted to.

29athrowaway 2y ago

Just call it ECMAScript and forget about "Java". "JavaScript" was not a good choice of name to begin with. The original JavaScript did not have much in common with Java.

steve_adams_86 2y ago
Brendan Eich said "ECMAScript was always an unwanted trade name that sounds like a skin disease". I think the general sentiment is shared fairly broadly.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- 29athrowaway 2y ago
  When JavaScript was created, Java was a trademark of Sun Microsystems. Then Oracle acquired Sun, and with it, the trademark to Java. And then this crap started. That was the moment to drop "Java" from the name, everyone knows exactly why.
  - tomxor 2y ago
    The issue is not with the "Java" trademark (also owned by Oracle), but the "JavaScript" trademark, which was issued to Sun in 1997. JavaScript was released in 1996... and not at Sun. i.e the Language and name both pre-date the trademark.
    - wslh 2y ago
      I'm not a lawyer, but I have a few trademarks myself, and I believe it's possible to apply for a trademark even if the language or term predates it. However, if there's a significant gap between the language's release and the trademark application, that could raise other questions. For example, if JavaScript was created in the '70s but Oracle applied for the trademark in the late '90s, when the language became popular, that could be a more complicated case. In this instance, though, there's only a one-year difference! It's quite common for businesses to file for trademarks after they see value in protecting a term. By the way, when I filed my first trademark application, Sun Microsystems filed an opposition. What a coincidence! This was before Oracle acquired them.

profsummergig 2y ago

I've always been fascinated by Larry Ellison ever since I read his biography (God something something). What's insane is how much of the culture he controls. In tech and outside. He's about to own the largest entertainment company, he owns some of the best real estate in the world, and he owns MySQL and Java. Genius (or maybe evil genius).

psunavy03 2y ago
There's a reason the joke is that "Oracle" stands for One Rich Asshole Called Larry Ellison.
- profsummergig 2y ago
  The crazy thing is that ORACLE was a CIA program that Larry got a contract for. He named his company after it. A genius aspect of Larry is that, like Steve Jobs (his best friend), he knew how to milk a gifted 50x programmer. There was a co-founder who did all the heavy code writing, while Larry did the schmoozing (not an unimportant job).
pjmorris 2y ago
'The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison[0]', Mike Wilson. It's a worthwhile read, and I think the joke is funny. [0] - God doesn't think he's Larry Ellison
qingcharles 2y ago
And he's pretty well installed in the White House this term too, especially with his role in Stargate and TikTok.

ryao 2y ago

Calling EMCAScript JavaScript was a huge mistake that is still biting us.

stephen_g 2y ago
OR alternatively, just not coming up with a better alternative name that ECMAScript. If there was a catchier alternative name that was less awkward to pronounce, people might more happily have switched over.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- westurner 2y ago
  "JS" because of the .js file extension. ECMAScript version history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript_version_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript_version_history "Java" is an island in Indonesia associated with coffee beans from the Dutch East Indies that Sun Microsystems named their portable software after. Coffee production in Indonesia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_production_in_Indonesia#Java https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_production_in_Indonesia... : > Certain estates age a portion of their coffee for up to five years, normally in large burlap sacks, which are regularly aired, dusted, and flipped.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ryao 2y ago
  Here is a novel idea. Just pronounce ECMA as a 2 syllable word using classical Latin pronunciation. Ecma becomes just as catchy as Java when pronounced that way. For English speakers who do not know classical Latin, just read this: Eck-Ma-Script Here is Eck for those who do not know: https://youtu.be/cqsDlZAK104 https://youtu.be/cqsDlZAK104 As for Ma, it is the second half of mama. That is actually /ɛkmɑskɹɪpt/ rather than /ekmaskɹɪpt/, but it is close enough.
  - 2y ago

jollofricepeas 2y ago

Maybe I’m missing something… I get it that Oracle is in the wrong but I’m still not sure why get in this trademark fight anyhow. I would personally leave it to someone with much larger pockets like Microsoft to deal with.

blmarket 2y ago
Oracle will fight like hell if there is a slightest chance to earn royalty from that trademark. edit: Microsoft or other companies have no financial benefit on that fight. Even Deno itself has no financial benefit as well. This fight is for goodwill but not justifiable for financial terms (unless you can be the next owner of JavaScript trademark)
morgannewman 2y ago
Well, it appears nobody else has taken the lead on this since 1997 so…

matt3210 2y ago

Lawyers on staff with nothing to do ATM…

toddmorey 2y ago

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.

Etheryte 2y ago
We could also rebrand it as Js and it would be the funniest thing ever. Few things would make me happier than seeing Oracle being screwed by something that's technically correct, but clearly nonsense to every living human being.
- scripturial 2y ago
  The only reason it hasn’t had a name change is oracle hasn’t tried to protect the name. There needs to be a campaign to change the name.
- jonny_eh 2y ago
  I saw someone recommend the JS rebrand years ago, so I just started using it. Everyone knows what I mean when I mention "JS", I never have to explain.
- giorgioz 2y ago
  Yes this seems to have become the best practice with all the JS Conf events and the logo showing JS. But frankly Oracle has always been a jerk and had miopic vision in things like this. I'm happy if someone also fights them on being a mindless jerk. They sued Google over Android using Java which was literally the best thing ever for Java. Java got learned by a whole new generation of developers (myself among those). Google at the time was also publishing the GWT Google Web Toolkit. Oracle would rather own a tombstone with written Java and JavaScript on it rather than set them free and find some other indirect ways to monetize. "If you love something, set them free" doesn't apply to Oracle, whose policies seem to show they have little love for development and software itself.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

culi 2y ago

> So last November, I filed a formal petition with the USPTO through my company, Deno, to cancel Oracle’s “JavaScript” trademark. Among other things, we pointed out that in 2019, Oracle renewed its trademark by submitting a screenshot of the Node.js website—a project I created—as proof of use, despite having no affiliation with it. Clown world. We go about thinking our legal system might have some flaws but generally "works"

floydnoel 2y ago

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?

t0ps0il 2y ago
> 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EdgeHTML
- floydnoel 2y ago
  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.
not_a_bot_4sho 2y ago
> Isn't MS's browser just Chromium? No. It's based on Chromium. It has quite a bit on functionally that's not available on Chrome or Chromium.
- floydnoel 2y ago
  for the purposes of this discussion, irrelevant. we are talking about JS implementations. extra bookmarking features or copilot slop isn't a factor.
stevefan1999 2y ago
Well, at least I can still install ublock origin on Edge, but I can't do that on Vanilla Chromium (yep, that manifest v3 thing is enabled by default for Chromium in Google's flavor)
GoblinSlayer 2y ago

sayrer 2y ago

They are using the wrong tactics. They should use the "Kleenex" argument and say it's generic. But what do I know.

svieira 2y ago
They're doing both - the issue is that the fraud issue either gets dropped (which Ryan doesn't want to do) or it blocks the second "generic" issue until resolved. > Oracle waited until the deadline to file this motion, delaying their response to the real issue: whether “JavaScript” is a generic term. and > Oracle won’t even discuss whether “JavaScript” should remain a trademark until they’ve finished dragging out this fraud claim. > This legal maneuvering puts us in a difficult position: > 1. Agree to drop the fraud claim, letting them get away with misrepresenting their trademark renewal. > 2. Spend months fighting this procedural issue before even getting to the real debate.
aardvarkr 2y ago
But they are… genericness is a key part of their argument. >Our petition challenges Oracle’s trademark on three grounds: >Genericness – JavaScript is a widely used programming language, not an Oracle product. >Abandonment – Oracle does not control, maintain, or enforce the trademark. >Fraud on the USPTO – Oracle submitted misleading evidence in its renewal filing.

krashidov 2y ago

I hope this is good marketing for Deno and not just a huge distraction. I feel like Bun is running circles around them right now. I feel like there might even be room for 3 winners (Bun, Deno, Node) but I don't understand the point of this. If Deno wins this battle will that make we want use Deno more?

bsimpson 2y ago
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.
- krashidov 2y ago
  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
  - crabmusket 2y ago
    > the most I hear from Deno is this lawsui Two days ago: https://deno.com/blog/jsr-open-governance-board 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.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - krashidov 2y ago
      > 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. Are they trying to build different things? I feel like they're direct competitors. Are you a Deno user? Curious what your experience has been

xiphias2 2y ago

Is ,,Oracle not controlling JavaScript'' really a good argument? Who wants Oracle to start controlling it? We're mostly better off leaving it a gray area maybe until Oracle gets more aggressive with it.

nhumrich 2y ago
Yes because in trademark lawsuits, proving a brand doesn't actually use it/control it, is a very common way for them to lose the trademark.

_7acn 2y ago

Just under 30 years ago, when I was starting my IT studies, I had an older colleague who was a great authority to me. When I began learning about RDBMS options, I called him to ask, „What do you think about Oracle?”. He just shouted, „Total crap!!!” and that was enough for me. Since then, to this day, I’ve never touched Oracle.

tw04 2y ago
I don't think it's necessarily fair to say Oracle is total crap. For decades they were more performant and had more features than most anything else on the market. They supported scale-out clustering on linux with Oracle RAC. They were early adopters of high performance NFS moving the NFS stack out of the linux kernel and directly into the database with DirectNFS. They built a clustered filesystem for block-based clusters (OCFS). HOWEVER, the way they run their business is horrible. Oracle the product was various versions of awesome to just OK. Oracle the business is a modern-day mafioso shakedown.
- rizky05 2y ago
  [dead]
- duxup 2y ago
  Yeah every argument about Oracle being bad is business related, not tech.
  - SeanAnderson 2y ago
    Mmm, one of the most memorable stories I've ever read on HN is about Oracle being bad at tech. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18442941 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18442941
    - duxup 2y ago
      I remember that one!

zoom6628 2y ago

To avoid "trade mark infringement" all the JS runtime owners could just make theirs not work on any oracle app or domain with a big annoying message about the case.

kbutler 2y ago

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.

jongjong 2y ago

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?

boblauer 2y ago
To answer your question, it's to give the appearance of fairness. It's the same reason Russia holds elections.

2d8a875f-39a2-4 2y ago

Imagine you start a new OSS RDBMS project. To help drive adoption you license a trademark from Oracle and call it "OracleBase", even though it has nothing much in common with the well known Oracle database other than also being an RDBMS. Despite not being objectively better than competitors OracleBase is wildly successful and basically takes over the OSS RDBMS space. Multiple other projects and vendors are building on your specs. A popular and extensive ecosystem develops around it. Many peoples careers are invested in its growth and success. One day you wake up in a cold sweat, suddenly remembering that the old trademark you licensed years ago is still there, pointed at your cathedral like a nuclear missile, with Larry Ellison's finger on the trigger.

jonny_eh 2y ago
It's good that Oracle doesn't own the trademark to SQL.
0x7cfe 2y ago
Honestly, I don't feel that the name is _that_ important for a project of such scale and popularity. I mean, if they'd just rebrand JavaScript as JS, no one would probably notice. Many devs already call it like that, and probably not a single soul feels JS connection to Java anymore (not to mention, it wasn't there in the first place, but oh well). Even bigger companies do rebranding sometimes.

bmacho 2y ago

> A company with no role in JavaScript’s past or future has no right to control its name. I like this, as a simple yet powerful slogen!

aqueueaqueue 2y ago

Deno is kind if a competitor to Oracle, so bear that in mind. Using deno? You ain't using Java then.

_old_dude_ 2y ago

I'm sympathetic to the points being made but the argument that Oracle does not have its own JavaScript runtime does not hold. An OracleBD is able to execute triggers written in JavaScript since quite some time. see https://blogs.oracle.com/java/post/multilingual-engine-executing-javascript-in-oracle%C2%A0database https://blogs.oracle.com/java/post/multilingual-engine-execu...

vips7L 2y ago
There is also the nashorn JavaScript engine and graaljs.
Narretz 2y ago
I don't think the article outright claims Oracle has no JavaScript runtime, only that Oracle JET is no runtime, which is true. And since this is the evidence Oracle presented to keep the trademark, it's fair to point out that this is nonsense. But it's also true that if this goes to court, Oracle could present GraalJS (which is used in OracleDB) as evidence for their case.

freetanga 2y ago

I say what I said to the last Oracle salesmen who visited me: “when your legal teams drives more revenue that your sales team, you know your company is deader than Larry Ellisons dick”

nubinetwork 2y ago

Please don't back out of this... oracle needs to be slapped down for every piece of software that they've bought (or scammed/stolen) and abused with neglect and hoarding, and trying to milk every dollar out of things they never created.

lakomen 2y ago

[flagged]

adolph 2y ago

1. Is anyone paying Oracle for this trademark? I ask because lawyers aren’t underpants gnomes; if there is not a revenue stream then what supports their effort? 2. The below quote from the article has a poignant innocence to it. Not as unhinged as Mullenwrg but still as deluded. I created Node.js and released it under the MIT license to benefit developers, not so it could be used as a legal pawn by a Fortune 500 company. Now, instead of correcting their misrepresentation, they’re using it to stall the case.

AutistiCoder 2y ago

I don't think Oracle's got a case here. They didn't really enforce the trademark.

phlosioneer 2y ago

On the fraud issue, while it's infuriating, I don't think you have standing to allege the actual issue. The issue is statement 17 of your filing is factually incorrect, as Oracle details in their motion to dismiss. The form, without that specimen, is still valid; the most the court could do is to strike that image from the record and everything else would remain unchanged. I'm not a lawyer, but from what I understand, you need standing to proceed with a claim. Standing here means that you were harmed or affected by the claim, and are seeking relief (i.e. asking the court to do/order something for you). The problem here, as Oracle points out, is that you were not harmed by the misrepresentation of the specimen. The USPTO was harmed by the misrepresentation, not you. A way around this issue would be if the USPTO delegated its authority to bring-misrepresentation-concerns to any applicant willing to pay the court costs. You'd have to check if any law delegated that authority (for judicial action), or if there's a separate form, process, or procedure used to handle the delegation (outside of judicial action). A similar example of this in action is EPA violations; for many cases, no individual has standing to bring the court action needed to address the harm being done. So the EPA was given that standing by law. Then the EPA delegates that authority as needed, or acts on its own. I think you should drop this claim and continue with the others, and look into how USPTO handles immaterial but knowingly-false information. They probably have some mechanism, so that people don't just... throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks.