3 ms·
The incredibly litigious company here is Deno. Deno sued on a whim, realized they were massively unprepared, then asked the public to fund a legal campaign tha
by TeaVMFan 10mo ago
The incredibly litigious company here is Deno. Deno sued on a whim, realized they were massively unprepared, then asked the public to fund a legal campaign that will benefit Deno themselves, a for-profit, VC-backed company.
This personal vendetta will likely end with the community unable to use the term JavaScript. Nobody should support this.
- jakelazaroff 10mo ago> This personal vendetta will likely end with the community unable to use the term JavaScript. Nobody should support this. Why would that be the case, if not for Oracle's litigiousness?
- striking 10mo agoYour comment seems incredibly confused. 1. Oracle is the litigious one here. My favorite example is that time they attacked a professor for publishing less-than-glowing benchmarks of their database: https://danluu.com/anon-benchmark/ https://danluu.com/anon-benchmark/ What's to stop them from suing anyone using the term JavaScript in a way that isn't blessed by them? That's what Deno is trying to protect against. 2. Deno is filing a petition to cancel the trademark, not claim it themselves. This would return it to the public commons. It should be obvious from these two facts that any member of the public that uses JavaScript should support this, regardless of what they think of Deno-the-company.
- DonHopkins 10mo agoHi Larry Ellison! Will you mow my lawn?