Remix clone Hacker News

> has not sold any JavaScript goods or rendered any JavaScript services since acquiring the trademark from Sun Microsystems in 2009.

I find this hard to believe.

Somewhere in the 159,000 employees of Oracle, someone has made and sold some product using the javascript brand.

Just a single example of "Javascript" written on a spec sheet of some product would be enough to defend the trademark.

▲

blagie a day ago | parent | next [-]

No, it wouldn't. Simple use of JavaScript somewhere isn't enough for this.

Oracle would need to show vigorous trademark enforcement. I use 'JavaScript' generically, with no reference to Oracle or a trademark, and have never heard from an Oracle lawyer. I had no idea who the current owner of the trademark was.

I bet 95% of people who use the term have no idea it has any connection to Oracle's legal department.

At this point, there are probably millions of .js files out there. If Oracle wished to enforce all of these moving to .es for ECMAScript, they would have needed to start that process a long, long time ago.

Oracle's own documentation uses this term generically:

https://docs.oracle.com/en/database/oracle/apex/22.1/aexjs/t...

To the contrary, a use like this doesn't support the trademark, but pretty much invalidates it entirely.

	▲	toast0 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> No, it wouldn't. Simple use of JavaScript somewhere isn't enough for this. > Oracle would need to show vigorous trademark enforcement. It sounds like the current approach is to challenge the registration based on abandonment by non-use. The defense against a challenge of non-use is an example of the trademark being used (by the holder or a licensee) in trade. A challenge based on abandonment by non-enforcement is also possible, but non-use is easier to show.

▲

tobr a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> Just a single example of "Javascript" written on a spec sheet of some product would be enough to defend the trademark.

Is that really true? Doesn’t it have to be used as a trademark? If they just mention the programming language in generic terms rather than as something specifically owned and sold by Oracle, would that really be enough? That’s exactly what you would expect from a generic term - that it would be used generically.