Oracle justified its JavaScript trademark with Node.js–now it wants that ignored
Comments
rtpg
chasil
Realistically, it's time for Microsoft to make some good karma, and give Javascript to the world.
They should wrest this from Oracle.
"Microsoft Edge: the browser that gave you <script> as no one else could."
WorldMaker
Microsoft lost that fight so badly long ago against Sun that Internet Explorer and Windows documentation for like a decade referred to the language as "JScript" (and also tried to make VBScript a viable alternative partly to avoid even accidentally using Sun's trademark) to the bemusement of everyone. Interesting to wonder if the web would have been a little better if Microsoft had won that trademark battle at the time or if Sun had donated the trademark to ECMA so that official standards didn't have to be named EcmaScript.
fennecbutt
Tbh I think we should just universally be ditching js for ts. I use them both every day and while it's nice to have such a flexible scripting language the amount the bend over for backwards compatibility and the glacial pace and gatekeeping of ecma International. Because of this all of the numerous flaws of the original design have been clutched onto and rigorously defended by so many righteous believers.
kaycebasques
> Sometimes you just gotta do the thing that takes forever.
Great phrase
kbutler
"schlep"
LoganDark
> [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"
rtpg
The open thing is that the person doing the thing is allowed a greater say to strategy IMO.
robertlagrant
This isn't the forum where strategic decisions are happening.
cafeinux
> IMO
Well you're not helping so you're not entitled to that opinion.
eviks
Maybe the main thing this disclaimer does is make more people aware of the quoted criticism
LorenDB
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.
pseudosavant
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.
xmprt
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 I didn't even know IE still existed at the time - I thought it had been replaced by Edge.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
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
>Microsoft support lifecycles are no joke.
Except for Mail and Calendar that they randomly decided to murder and replace with some Outlook webapp garbage.
wongarsu
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...
MiddleEndian
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.
jsheard
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
Yeah of course haha just ranting
chasil
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.
userbinator
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
> 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?gkbrk
> And, in 2025, is there a better engine than Chromium?
WebKit and Gecko are way better
userbinator
IE UI, Chromium engine.
throwaway2037
No trolling: Isn't that Microsoft Edge?
3836293648
No?
Edge still looks almost exactly like any other Chromium version?
egeozcan
I wish someone recreated Netscape Navigator UI with the Gecko engine. I can't give any reasons, I just wish it.
timw4mail
That's what Netscape was...especially after the release of Firefox.
datavirtue
That sounds dangerous.
jsheard
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.
ndneighbor
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
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
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.
wrs
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.)
cmgbhm
If they win, there’s a forever revenue stream to extract and they keep their TM law sharp.
thot_experiment
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.
enpera
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.
thayne
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.
cyberax
Even during the darkest days, IBM made reliable unkillable overengineered stuff.
Oracle has been making only lawsuits for a while.
jclulow
Since at least the introduction of the DeWitt clause, if not earlier!
nhumrich
It's pushed by a teenager and cuts grass?
mbo
> 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)
EMIRELADERO
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?
bcantrill
I am glad to see that many people are being correcting you, but just to put a sharp point on it: I am using that metaphor to condemn Ellison, not to condone or accept him.
Unfortunately, since that talk in 2011, what was an aberration (albeit a broadly unspoken one) has since -- tragically -- become the norm. I refuse to accept this, however: I will continue to speak my truth about the moral decay in tech, and why we must hold ourselves to a higher standard.[0][1][2][3][4] And I obviously agree with your indignation that poor corporate behavior should not be the status quo!
[0] Principles of Technology Leadership, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QMGAtxUlAc (2017)
[1] Andreessen's Corollary: Ethical Dilemmas in Software Engineering, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wtvQZijPzg (2019)
[2] (Anti-)application Video for YC120, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=px9OjW7GB0Q (2019)
[3] Coming Of Age, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzdVSMRu16g (2022)
[4] Intelligence is not Enough, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQfJi7rjuEk (2023)
EMIRELADERO
Welp. I'm officially sorry. I guess my indignation with the ethics status quo at the moment blindisded me and I read the quote in the wrong light/context.
Definitely gonna take a look at those videos too, thank you so much for everything!
bcantrill
Nothing to apologize for! Especially if you had only seen the quote, it's an entirely reasonable inference. And I am frankly embarrassed about how much mores in tech have shifted since 2011 -- and what would have been inferred as obvious decrying then is much less obvious now!
dwheeler
I urge you to watch the video to see the context. Cantrill does not think this is acceptable, never mind celebrated.
Terr_
You could interpret it the other way: Such executives don't have moral protection.
robertlagrant
No one is celebrating anything.
chris_wot
[flagged]
jongjong
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
To answer your question, it's to give the appearance of fairness. It's the same reason Russia holds elections.
kingforaday
Anyone else read the article and say Oracle JET? What is that?
threecheese
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!
phpnode
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.
davidsojevic
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!
thayne
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.
ZeWaka
This is really neat, thanks. Their linked Visual Builder Cookbook (https://vbcookbook.oracle.com) also is a nice way to internally communicate design patterns.
bjt12345
I've always sat there wondering if my Breville expresso machine is running Breville JavaScript(c) inside it.
ikesau
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.
phpnode
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.
tom1337
Yea their CLI has 510 Weekly Downloads on npm and JET itself nearly 1000.
https://www.npmjs.com/package/@oracle/ojet-cli https://www.npmjs.com/package/@oracle/oraclejet
dangrossman
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.
tom1337
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.
realusername
In the Node world that's basically a side project of a single dev.
zoom6628
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.
nnurmanov
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
_old_dude_
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-execu...
Narretz
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.
vips7L
There is also the nashorn JavaScript engine and graaljs.
floydnoel
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?
stevefan1999
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)
not_a_bot_4sho
> 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
for the purposes of this discussion, irrelevant. we are talking about JS implementations. extra bookmarking features or copilot slop isn't a factor.
t0ps0il
> 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.
floydnoel
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.
JavierFlores09
it only seems right to mention them, after all they did have the most used JS implementation back in the day, even if it is barely used nowadays.
seanclayton
MS implements JS with its typescript compiler
29athrowaway
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
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.
forgetfreeman
Yep. There are also many of us that wish it'd stuck out of a deep seated love for truth in advertising.
leptons
Microsoft called their version "JScript", including JScript.NET.
29athrowaway
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
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
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.
ksynwa
It does sound like a skin disease
pitched
Javascript is used so widely now that calling it just “Script” is probably fair and would be a lot harder to trademark
Legion
"WebScript". Call it what it is (non-web uses notwithstanding).
codr7
HTSL, Hypertext Scripting Language
chuckadams
“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.
CountHackulus
I remember briefly calling it DHTML. But that was ages ago.
olestr
LiveScript was, and still is, a much better name
kbutler
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.
zoom6628
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.
toddmorey
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
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.
jonny_eh
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.
scripturial
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.
giorgioz
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.
ilaksh
That's an interesting idea. Just to mention though:
LiveScript is a really great language that compiles to JavaScript.
vips7L
Wasn’t LiveScript JS’s original name?
cafeinux
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.
jazzypants
No. It was the same language. Livewire was the server tech. Livewire implemented a <server> tag in LiveScript, but the majority of the scripting implementation was exactly the same. [0]
JS was originally named Mocha, but it was renamed to LiveScript as a tie-in with the server tech. However, after the deal with Sun Microsystems to put Java in the browser, it was almost scrapped before being saved by giving it the final name of JavaScript. [1]
To clarify, there was around a fifteen year gap between Livewire and Node.js, so things were not quite as streamlined as you implied.
[0]: https://dev.to/macargnelutti/server-side-javascript-a-decade...
[1] https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/node-up-and/97814493322...
mech422
I thought that was 'ecmascript' ??
Someone1234
It is, but everyone hates that and has no idea how to say it.
mech422
LOL - fair enough. Always sounded like a skin condition to me.. (I'm not a JS programmer though)
probably_wrong
I'm so glad we're all in agreement regarding how to say "gif".
throwfgtpwd234
gift without t. ;)
WorldMaker
Which was the original spelling of that word in Old English, which is why I've come to prefer the Old English pronunciation for gif: HYEEF.
throwfgtpwd234
[flagged]
mrmincent
I like NetScript, give a little callback to Netscape.
jonny_eh
Hear me out: TypeScript
Timwi
UntypeScript
throwfgtpwd234
TypelessScript
(Very fun to type when the "S" is lowercased.)
thayne
I also wouldn't complain about losing the confusion between Java and JavaScript.
GoblinSlayer
Microsoft calls its variant "JScript".
throwfgtpwd234
That no longer exists in any meaningful form.
robertlagrant
Can we call it LarryScript?
throwfgtpwd234
JarvisPact
freetanga
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”
MaxGripe
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
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.
stickfigure
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.
sakesun
People either love or hate Oracle back then. I was in the love group. However, in recent days, Oracle is pretty irrelevant, imho.
throwfgtpwd234
I'd rather pay money to EnterpriseDB than give it to Redwood Shores.
chris_wot
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.
throwfgtpwd234
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.
cyberax
> They supported scale-out clustering on linux with Oracle RAC.
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.
duxup
Yeah every argument about Oracle being bad is business related, not tech.
SeanAnderson
Mmm, one of the most memorable stories I've ever read on HN is about Oracle being bad at tech.
duxup
I remember that one!
theragra
Yeah, this is legendary comment
WorldMaker
The one job where I got to experience an Oracle database in action, back around ought four (allegedly one of the good periods for Oracle's db tech):
A) Performance was so terrible by default the DBAs were cops and had given up on real RDBMS performance tools such as indexes and keys (primary and foreign) and instead used a ton of arcane low level file management tools like Oracle was some sort of "build your own DB kit" and the out of the box one was terrible so they needed a bespoke hand built one
B) I was once in a CLI running some sort of very basic Select statement (no joins, because again, no keys; single table; maybe a couple of columns) and watched in horror as an entire Java-based debugger IDE not installed on my extremely locked down work machine launched, spun up, and dived deep, deep into a terrifying stacktrace comprising an awful mix of C++ and Java code. To this day I don't know how or why a Select statement (that worked the second time) crashed so hard into Oracle's own source code. It is possibly related to part A above, but I'm still not sure. I don't know why the debugger symbols much less actual source code from Oracle were even available when it did crash that hard. I did know at the time that actually debugging Oracle's code was very far above my pay grade and in addition to sending the debugger IDE they should have also attached a large check.
I think of that experience often when people tell me that Oracle actually has good tech. If it weren't obvious from how awful their tools are to use as a user (a different previous employer used Oracle's expensive time/attendance/payroll tools and those were the clunkiest, worst web apps to use), that brief, weird horror story of the Select statement in a CMD.EXE window REPL bringing up the wildest stack trace in a debugger that didn't exist on my machine will always leave me feeling doubtful about that.
jeremyjh
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.
duxup
I probably should have said that most conversations… don’t reach the tech stage and stop at their business practices.
rizky05
[dead]
makeitdouble
IME you don't usually choose Oracle. Someone choose it for you, and you can move somewhere else if you really hate it.
chasil
The SQL/PSM standard comes from Oracle, and is variously implemented in PostgreSQL, MariaDB, IBM Db2, and more.
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."
mmastrac
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
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
> 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
> 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.
phlosioneer
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.
culi
> 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"
bmacho
> 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!
krashidov
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
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
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
> the most I hear from Deno is this lawsui
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.
krashidov
> 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
crabmusket
Well e.g. JSR is different to anything I've seen from the Bun team, so yes.
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.
WorldMaker
Deno 2 was a major release entirely about shoring up Node compatibility. That's arguably a big reason for why Bun seems to have a higher velocity right now of the trio. Deno put in a ton of engineering into Node/npm compatibility, it shows, and right now I would recommend trying Deno as having suprisingly few compatibility/ecosystem issues remaining.
(Deno has not stayed entirely still, other new features were added outside of that compatibility effort, but Bun doesn't have Node compatibility as much as a goal today and so gets the fast mover award.)
I started using Deno in hobby projects because I like the out-of-the-box defaults a lot better than Node (deno.json is a lot simpler than a lot of the cruft that package.json has acquired, but also includes more things in one place like out of the box eslint support [deno lint] and prettier-equivalent [deno fmt]). Also, Deno Deploy has a generous free tier and that's a healthy incentive for hobby projects that want a modest database (Deno KV) and basic task processing queues.
crabmusket
I also used Deno for some side projects before 1.0 and I really like it. Especially its focus on web stanrards, and yes, being an all-in-one tool. But I don't have the time or inclination for a lot of side projects these days.
I actually feel much more warmly to Deno than Bun, and would use it if I felt like it made sense. I tried to avoid advocating either way in my former posts in this thread. But regardless of my personal feelings, at work pragmatism rules the day.
2d8a875f-39a2-4
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
It's good that Oracle doesn't own the trademark to SQL.
0x7cfe
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.
aqueueaqueue
Deno is kind if a competitor to Oracle, so bear that in mind. Using deno? You ain't using Java then.
matt3210
Lawyers on staff with nothing to do ATM…
profsummergig
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
There's a reason the joke is that "Oracle" stands for One Rich Asshole Called Larry Ellison.
profsummergig
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
'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
And he's pretty well installed in the White House this term too, especially with his role in Stargate and TikTok.
AutistiCoder
I don't think Oracle's got a case here.
They didn't really enforce the trademark.
sayrer
They are using the wrong tactics. They should use the "Kleenex" argument and say it's generic. But what do I know.
svieira
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
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.
adolph
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.
ryao
Calling EMCAScript JavaScript was a huge mistake that is still biting us.
stephen_g
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.
westurner
"JS" because of the .js file extension.
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.
ryao
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:
As for Ma, it is the second half of mama. That is actually /ɛkmɑskɹɪpt/ rather than /ekmaskɹɪpt/, but it is close enough.
ellm
> Eck-Ma-Script
I thought this is how it was generally pronounced, it's at least what I say. (It still sounds like a skin disease though.) Is there some other more popular pronunciation?
lofenfew
I was under the impression that this was the pronounciation that sounded like a skin disease.
ryao
I miss rote ECMAScript as EMCAScript. ECMA does not sound like a skin disease to me. EMCA might though.
stephen_g
The pronunciation that I assumed (also suggested by other replies), eck-ma, sounds very close to how ‘eczema’ is pronounced in much of the world.
arp242
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.
ryao
ECMAScript is what people who want to avoid Oracle’s trademark say. Being anachronistic is irrevelant as long as Oracle has the trademark.
lakomen
[flagged]
indulona
[flagged]
xiphias2
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
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.
jollofricepeas
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
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
Well, it appears nobody else has taken the lead on this since 1997 so…
nubinetwork
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.
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!