new | show | ask | jobs Github

phplovesong 10 hours ago

That boat sailed soooo many years ago tho. Oracle has no business claiming javascript as a trademark.

▲

eastbound 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Or let Oracle trial everyone for the number of processors they have on their JavaScript machines.

▲

cies 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Oracle is in the business of bullying others using their big legal dept.

We all know this.

> Oracle has no business claiming javascript as a trademark.

You think so. That's okay. But ultimately it is up to a judge to decide. Right?

I agree with the EcmaScript. Just ditch the stupid name. Get all the petition signers to agree an move on. Fuck Oracle. Fuck JavaScript (it's nothing like Java anyway).

▲

mcny 9 hours ago | parent [-]

> But ultimately it is up to a judge to decide. Right?

I think we are getting a rude awakening about what is legal versus what is actually right are not always the same thing. There are some the horrible, horrible things here and the laws need updating, as opposed to us simply saying this is for a judge to decide and there is nothing else we can do.

I am ok with ditching the JavaScript name. I understand this cuts the problem entirely. However, there are other problems we have that we can't bypass so easily.

We need copyright terms to be much reduced. We need CFAA fully repealed and not replaced by anything. We need to abolish software patents. There is a lot we need to do that will likely take a century to accomplish and that's likely being too optimistic.

What we can't do is leave everything up to the judges because clearly even if we get a favorable ruling today, the precedent can be removed by another stroke of a pen.

	▲	embedding-shape 9 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> I think we are getting a rude awakening about what is legal versus what is actually right are not always the same thing. I'm not sure who "we" are here (Americans perhaps?), but humanity as a whole have known this for a long time, and acted accordingly. This is why presidents in some countries have the right to pardon people, as just one very evident example. That the USA exists as a country today is another example, which at the time when they were trying to create it, was clearly illegal, but since winners write history, still a "good" action. The the laws aren't 100% unambiguous and strict is also another example, so there is room for interpretation, as something can be "by the book legal" but because of the clear evil motivations and "ignoring the spirit of the law", still be illegal. Of course, highly dependent on the country and lots of counter-examples.
	▲	cies 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Completely agree. But that's more of a general matter than this specific matter. Judges is the best we have. US has juries, not sure if that makes it better. More importantly we need to criminalize lobbying in order to get control back over "our democracies" (what ever that still means today).