| ▲ | evolve2k 5 days ago |
| Seems a worthy community contribution on first glance. Just to check on a maybe obvious question, Deno is not trademarked is it? |
|
| ▲ | NoahZuniga 5 days ago | parent [-] |
| Does it matter? When I say deno, you think of the software product deno, produced by deno. Just like when I say coca cola, you think of the specific drink produced by the coca cola company. What I say escalator, you don't think of that specific company's products, but of the staircase conveyor. When I say javascript, do you think of any oracle product? No! So why should users of javascript live in fear of a lawsuite from oracle? |
| |
| ▲ | evolve2k 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Oh it very much matters. Folks are questioning the legitimacy of this endeavour. It’d be total hypocracy for them to be freeing JavaScript from Oracle and stating trademarks are bad and then to be maintaining similar themselves. | | |
| ▲ | fourthark 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | You aren’t addressing the argument, which is that the word Deno is not similar to the word JavaScript. Also Deno is not claiming that trademarks are bad, they’re claiming that JavaScript is a commonly used term. | |
| ▲ | kasajian 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I don't agree. I don't think of Oracle at all when I think of JavaScript.
And I also don't care whether they own the trademark. There's no hypocrisy. | |
| ▲ | LeFantome 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | They mapped out the argument they were making quite clearly. Then you accused them of making a different argument. |
|
|
