4 ms·

They don't have the right to do this. Oracle safeguards the JavaScript trademark against abuse with it's powerful legal teams and has a track record of good ste

by op7 1y ago

They don't have the right to do this. Oracle safeguards the JavaScript trademark against abuse with it's powerful legal teams and has a track record of good stewardship. These guys want to hijack their property and let it loose to the wild west. Who knows what unethical actors will do with it..

simonh 1y ago
Freedom is all very well until someone decides they are free to come and take your stuff, or lie about you, or pretend to be you.
conartist6 1y ago
Most people just call the language "JS" cause Oracle doesn't own that trademark. That's why you wouldn't be able to have a JavascriptConf but we do have JSConf. This is a long-winded way of saying that we already know what people would do with the freedom to speak the name of the language and it's nothing worth fearmongering over... It's for the courts to determine who had what rights, but it's Oracle that is credibly accused of greatly exceeding the rights given them under the law
suprfsat 1y ago
For example, low effort trolling, or self-propagating supply chain attacks.
nchmy 1y ago
The entire point is that oracle has done nothing with the trademark - especially not being a good steward. What bizarro world are you living in?
- nurettin 1y ago
  > oracle has done nothing with the trademark In my Bizarro world, that is a good thing. Not doing things includes: * Not monetizing * Not advertising * No agendas * No lawsuits * No enforcement (other than annoying organizations with C&D letters and then retracting them) I would like it to remain as it is.
  - davorak 1y ago
    If they are not using the trademark for anything, at least by US law, I think they do not get to keep it. The point of trademarks is to promote the production of public good, and if they are not in use they are not producing public good, but will consume public resources, like people dealing with C&D letter or the current time and effort from the government on deno's filings.
  - mmcclure 1y ago
    I agree that Oracle has been a perfectly fine trademark holder in all of these regards in that they are entirely irrelevant to JavaScript and have been for as long as I can remember. The point here is that them not doing those things would be codified. Deno's not trying to take the trademark from them for themselves, they're trying to get the USPTO to agree that JavaScript is a generic term at this point and unable to be trademarked or owned by any one entity. I'm not sure how that changes any of the bullet points you've got above. It's nice that points 4 and 5 would become completely impossible and not just improbable because the trademark owner currently doesn't care enough to do it.

by op7 1y ago

simonh 1y ago

Freedom is all very well until someone decides they are free to come and take your stuff, or lie about you, or pretend to be you.

conartist6 1y ago

Most people just call the language "JS" cause Oracle doesn't own that trademark. That's why you wouldn't be able to have a JavascriptConf but we do have JSConf. This is a long-winded way of saying that we already know what people would do with the freedom to speak the name of the language and it's nothing worth fearmongering over... It's for the courts to determine who had what rights, but it's Oracle that is credibly accused of greatly exceeding the rights given them under the law

suprfsat 1y ago

For example, low effort trolling, or self-propagating supply chain attacks.

nchmy 1y ago

The entire point is that oracle has done nothing with the trademark - especially not being a good steward. What bizarro world are you living in?

nurettin 1y ago
> oracle has done nothing with the trademark In my Bizarro world, that is a good thing. Not doing things includes: * Not monetizing * Not advertising * No agendas * No lawsuits * No enforcement (other than annoying organizations with C&D letters and then retracting them) I would like it to remain as it is.
- davorak 1y ago
  If they are not using the trademark for anything, at least by US law, I think they do not get to keep it. The point of trademarks is to promote the production of public good, and if they are not in use they are not producing public good, but will consume public resources, like people dealing with C&D letter or the current time and effort from the government on deno's filings.
- mmcclure 1y ago
  I agree that Oracle has been a perfectly fine trademark holder in all of these regards in that they are entirely irrelevant to JavaScript and have been for as long as I can remember. The point here is that them not doing those things would be codified. Deno's not trying to take the trademark from them for themselves, they're trying to get the USPTO to agree that JavaScript is a generic term at this point and unable to be trademarked or owned by any one entity. I'm not sure how that changes any of the bullet points you've got above. It's nice that points 4 and 5 would become completely impossible and not just improbable because the trademark owner currently doesn't care enough to do it.