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!
> [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"
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.
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
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
The likelihood of the JavaScript trademark bringing any real benefit to Oracle in the future is close to zero, but the legal costs of taking it to court are significant. For the sake of mere spite and mean-spiritedness they seem to be trying to waste the company's money.
Yes, the only upside I can see for them is it reinforces their reputation of being ruthless in legal proceedings. Which you might consider a good thing if you subscribe to the "it is better to be feared than loved" philosophy.
> 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)
I started to dislike that quote somewhat. Why should we celebrate the fact that our society doesn't place moral pressure onto executives? Why should we find it acceptable that this is the status quo?
The npm package for Oracle JET, with ~1000 weekly downloads, has four dependent packages on npm, and if you walk down the dependency tree it’s nearly entirely other Oracle packages or long dead demos/one-shots.
That 1,000 weekly downloads could be entirely from CI pipelines for those other Oracle projects.
The phone call is coming from inside the house, Larry!
They do have more users than that, but from memory they typically distribute it in some other interesting way - i think there's a CLI that installs and manages it.
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!
This is really neat, thanks. Their linked Visual Builder Cookbook (https://vbcookbook.oracle.com) also is a nice way to internally communicate design patterns.
it's Oracle's UI library that they encourage their official partners to use. I've had the misfortune of doing some consulting for a company that used it, it's actually very fully featured but the internals are totally insane and very dated.
A date picker widget I tossed on NPM 13 years ago gets 32,000 downloads per week. 510 a week is background activity, that's indexing bots or one org's CI system.
I totally agree. I thought about adding a paragraph about how it seems like even oracle themself doesn’t use it on production (cause otherwise it’d have probably more downloads due to developers, CI, you name it) but it is possible they use a internal npm proxy with a cache.
Anyway it’s laughable that this package is the reason they base their argument on.
They did several wrong decisions, first they started building it with old libraries, e.g. JQuery, KnockoutJS, then they they should have opened their no code builder to the public. They are now in the process of porting it to Preact and opened VBCS, but it’s too late. From UI point of view, it is the most complete library
It's their JS UI components library. Gets used in oracle apps. Very comprehensive in terms of covering all you need. Another comment opines on its technical soundness.
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
According to Wikipedia, it was a server-side language, that NetScape adapted to client-side and renamed JavaScript a few days before go-live, to piggyback on Java's name and please Sun Microsystem shareholders.
Then people created node.js and went back to server-side JS. Life is cyclical.
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.
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.
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.
In the early 2000s, nearing the launch of The Sims Online, Oracle sent their sales team to Maxis. I was a newish employee and wasn't involved in the decision process, but I overhead much of the conversation (my desk was just outside Will Wright's office[1]). Every time the Oracle rep said "if you invest in RAC..." (emphasis theirs) I absolutely cringed at the blatant attempt at NLP.
They bought it, and it was a disaster. Turns out you can't just take a system designed without partitioning in mind and put it on a distributed database. Not that it mattered; the system saw a tiny fraction of its expected usage. The whole game was an absurd amount of money spent on nothing.
To this day I have never used another Oracle product.
[1] I don't think Will Wright was involved in that decision either; I think he was fully checked-out by then and in any case ops wasn't his bailiwick. The conversation just happened to take place in his office.
It doesn't matter how great their database was. If they want to shake down businesses (which they are known to do), then don't have anything to do with them. Ever.
The type of business that rests on its laurels and believes ratcheting continuously-increasing rent seeking at the expense of goodwill will soon find themselves without new customers and possibly without a market because they took their self-assured dominance for granted. Hubris. Cfengine and Tripwire both found that out the hard way.
Oh no, they have shoveled some shit in their day for sure. I mean their ERP, their enterprise java bean stuff. But their flagship database product was always quite good, especially if you had staff or consultants who really knew it.
"SQL/PSM is derived, seemingly directly, from Oracle's PL/SQL. Oracle developed PL/SQL and released it in 1991, basing the language on the US Department of Defense's Ada programming language. However, Oracle has maintained a distance from the standard in its documentation. IBM's SQL PL (used in DB2) and Mimer SQL's PSM were the first two products officially implementing SQL/PSM."
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?
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.
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
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.
> 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
> 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"
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.
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).
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.
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?
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.
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.
“LiveScript” wasn’t bad. They really did aim to make JS a scripting system for Java tho, through the LiveConnect Bridge. Unfortunately LiveConnect was a buggy POS. MS had a similar thing going on that was less buggy, but IE-only of course.
So yeah, I don’t miss LiveConnect. Let’s just call it “WebScript” or something.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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)
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.
That's anachronistic: it was called JavaScript long before the ECMA specification and the ECMAScript name appeared. That the JavaScript name is dumb is pretty much universally agreed on.
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!
They should wrest this from Oracle.
"Microsoft Edge: the browser that gave you <script> as no one else could."
Great phrase
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"
Well you're not helping so you're not entitled to that opinion.
Yes, those are old by now, but it's still a blast from the past.
Except for Mail and Calendar that they randomly decided to murder and replace with some Outlook webapp garbage.
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...
I wish they'd done the opposite instead: same UI, but with a better browser engine.
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.
Oracle has been making only lawsuits for a while.
That 1,000 weekly downloads could be entirely from CI pipelines for those other Oracle projects.
The phone call is coming from inside the house, Larry!
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.
How about the Oracle Java Virtual Machine.
https://www.npmjs.com/package/@oracle/ojet-cli https://www.npmjs.com/package/@oracle/oraclejet
see https://blogs.oracle.com/java/post/multilingual-engine-execu...
> 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?
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
No. It's based on Chromium. It has quite a bit on functionally that's not available on Chrome or Chromium.
I like this, as a simple yet powerful slogen!
There would be good support and we could do it fairly swiftly. To hell with Oracle.
LiveScript is a really great language that compiles to JavaScript.
https://livescript.net/
Then people created node.js and went back to server-side JS. Life is cyclical.
(Very fun to type when the "S" is lowercased.)
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.
They bought it, and it was a disaster. Turns out you can't just take a system designed without partitioning in mind and put it on a distributed database. Not that it mattered; the system saw a tiny fraction of its expected usage. The whole game was an absurd amount of money spent on nothing.
To this day I have never used another Oracle product.
[1] I don't think Will Wright was involved in that decision either; I think he was fully checked-out by then and in any case ops wasn't his bailiwick. The conversation just happened to take place in his office.
That never worked right. Amazon got burned trying to use it, Sberbank in Russia went down hard for several days because RAC just crashed, etc.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18442941
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL/PSM
"SQL/PSM is derived, seemingly directly, from Oracle's PL/SQL. Oracle developed PL/SQL and released it in 1991, basing the language on the US Department of Defense's Ada programming language. However, Oracle has maintained a distance from the standard in its documentation. IBM's SQL PL (used in DB2) and Mimer SQL's PSM were the first two products officially implementing SQL/PSM."
If Deno wins this battle will that make we want use Deno more?
I'm not saying Deno doesn't have merits, I just wonder if this is the thing they should be focused on
Two days ago: 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.
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
I didn't mean Deno and Bun's core offerings are different, but that there are differences in what they're each applying time and effort to.
I'm a Node user. I haven't yet seen a compelling reason to switch that justifies potential compatibility/ecosystem issues.
Clown world. We go about thinking our legal system might have some flaws but generally "works"
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.
Even bigger companies do rebranding sometimes.
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.
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.
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?
"JavaScript" was not a good choice of name to begin with. The original JavaScript did not have much in common with Java.
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.
JavaScript was released in 1996... and not at Sun.
i.e the Language and name both pre-date the trademark.
By the way, when I filed my first trademark application, Sun Microsystems filed an opposition. What a coincidence! This was before Oracle acquired them.
So yeah, I don’t miss LiveConnect. Let’s just call it “WebScript” or something.
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.
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).
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).
[0] - God doesn't think he's Larry Ellison
> 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.
>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.
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.
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)
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... :
> 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.
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.