Oracle Won't Withdraw 'JavaScript' Trademark, Says Deno. Legal Skirmish Continues (infoworld.com) 48
"Oracle has informed us they won't voluntarily withdraw their trademark on 'JavaScript'." That's the word coming from the company behind Deno, the alternative JavaScript/TypeScript/WebAssembly runtime, which is pursuing a formal cancellation with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
So what happens next? Oracle "will file their Answer, and we'll start discovery to show how 'JavaScript' is widely recognized as a generic term and not controlled by Oracle." Deno's social media posts show a schedule of various court dates that extend through July of 2026, so "The dispute between Oracle and Deno Land could go on for quite a while," reports InfoWorld: Deno Land co-founder Ryan Dahl, creator of both the Deno and Node.js runtimes, said a formal answer from Oracle is expected before February 3, unless Oracle extends the deadline again. "After that, we will begin the process of discovery, which is where the real legal work begins. It will be interesting to see how Oracle argues against our claims — genericide, fraud on the USPTO, and non-use of the mark."
The legal process begins with a discovery conference by March 5, with discovery closing by September 1, followed by pretrial disclosure from October 16 to December 15. An optional request for an oral hearing is due by July 8, 2026.
Oracle took ownership of JavaScript's trademark in 2009 when it purchased Sun Microsystems, InfoWorld notes.
But "Oracle does not control (and has never controlled) any aspect of the specification or how the phrase 'JavaScript' can be used by others," argues an official petition filed by Deno Land Inc. with the United States Patent and Trademark Office: Today, millions of companies, universities, academics, and programmers, including Petitioner, use "JavaScript" daily without any involvement with Oracle. The phrase "JavaScript" does not belong to one corporation. It belongs to the public. JavaScript is the generic name for one of the bedrock languages of modern programming, and, therefore, the Registered Mark must be canceled.
An open letter to Oracle discussing the genericness of the phrase "JavaScript," published at https://javascript.tm/, was signed by 14,000+ individuals at the time of this Petition to Cancel, including notable figures such as Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, and the current editors of the JavaScript specification, Michael Ficarra and Shu-yu Guo. There is broad industry and public consensus that the term "JavaScript" is generic.
The seven-page petition goes into great detail, reports InfoWorld. "Deno Land also accused Oracle of committing fraud in its trademark renewal efforts in 2019 by submitting screen captures of the website of JavaScript runtime Node.js, even though Node.js was not affiliated with Oracle."
So what happens next? Oracle "will file their Answer, and we'll start discovery to show how 'JavaScript' is widely recognized as a generic term and not controlled by Oracle." Deno's social media posts show a schedule of various court dates that extend through July of 2026, so "The dispute between Oracle and Deno Land could go on for quite a while," reports InfoWorld: Deno Land co-founder Ryan Dahl, creator of both the Deno and Node.js runtimes, said a formal answer from Oracle is expected before February 3, unless Oracle extends the deadline again. "After that, we will begin the process of discovery, which is where the real legal work begins. It will be interesting to see how Oracle argues against our claims — genericide, fraud on the USPTO, and non-use of the mark."
The legal process begins with a discovery conference by March 5, with discovery closing by September 1, followed by pretrial disclosure from October 16 to December 15. An optional request for an oral hearing is due by July 8, 2026.
Oracle took ownership of JavaScript's trademark in 2009 when it purchased Sun Microsystems, InfoWorld notes.
But "Oracle does not control (and has never controlled) any aspect of the specification or how the phrase 'JavaScript' can be used by others," argues an official petition filed by Deno Land Inc. with the United States Patent and Trademark Office: Today, millions of companies, universities, academics, and programmers, including Petitioner, use "JavaScript" daily without any involvement with Oracle. The phrase "JavaScript" does not belong to one corporation. It belongs to the public. JavaScript is the generic name for one of the bedrock languages of modern programming, and, therefore, the Registered Mark must be canceled.
An open letter to Oracle discussing the genericness of the phrase "JavaScript," published at https://javascript.tm/, was signed by 14,000+ individuals at the time of this Petition to Cancel, including notable figures such as Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript, and the current editors of the JavaScript specification, Michael Ficarra and Shu-yu Guo. There is broad industry and public consensus that the term "JavaScript" is generic.
The seven-page petition goes into great detail, reports InfoWorld. "Deno Land also accused Oracle of committing fraud in its trademark renewal efforts in 2019 by submitting screen captures of the website of JavaScript runtime Node.js, even though Node.js was not affiliated with Oracle."
Just call it ECMAScript (Score:5, Informative)
Isn't it the same thing?
Re:Just call it ECMAScript (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The point is that people call it JavaScript
And they can continue to do so.
The trademark doesn't mean you can't call JavaScript "JavaScript".
It just means you can't call other things "JavaScript".
Why would anyone need to do that?
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that people call it JavaScript
And they can continue to do so.
The trademark doesn't mean you can't call JavaScript "JavaScript".
It just means you can't call other things "JavaScript".
Why would anyone need to do that?
I'm not so sure that's how a trademark works. As I understand it, a trademark is valid in a specific product category or categories, and does not prohibit using the same name elsewhere. Assuming the mark is valid, you can't call a new programming language JavaScript since it would be confusing, but could call an airplane JavaScript because no one would confuse a plane with a programing language.
Re: (Score:2)
but could call an airplane JavaScript because no one would confuse a plane with a programing language.
Wasn't MCAS written in JavaScript? Seems right...
Re: (Score:3)
JavaScript is a programming language that conforms to the ECMAScript specification. It extends ECMAScript with additional functionality specific to web development, such as interacting with the DOM and making network requests. At least that is my understanding.
Re:Just call it ECMAScript (Score:4, Funny)
JavaScript is a programming language that conforms to the ECMAScript specification. It extends ECMAScript with additional functionality specific to web development, such as interacting with the DOM and making network requests. At least that is my understanding.
An ECMAScript-compliant language needed a marketing boost, and decided to add the popular name “Java” to a programming language to make mainstream adoption faster and/or easier. At least that’s my understanding.
But don’t take my iWord on it. I’m just a McLawyer getting ready to get Super Sized sued for no whatsoever. Just because I called my clients “Swifties” and used a Swoosh logo on my website. Damn. It’s almost like the concept of trademark IP is alive and well.
And Oracle wants a legal battle? Weeeeeird. /s
Re:Just call it ECMAScript (Score:4, Informative)
JavaScript is a programming language that conforms to the ECMAScript specification. It extends ECMAScript with additional functionality specific to web development, such as interacting with the DOM and making network requests. At least that is my understanding.
An ECMAScript-compliant language needed a marketing boost, and decided to add the popular name “Java” to a programming language to make mainstream adoption faster and/or easier. At least that’s my understanding.
JavaScript was first announced - under that name - in 1995. The ECMAScript standard didn't come out until mid-1997. So it's not quite as you describe.
Re: (Score:2)
I know you like to call your vehicle a car, but Ford is now trademarking that term. So going forward, let's call it a HTD — human transport device.
Isn't that the same thing?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not going to happen.
ECMAScript sounds like something you cough up to put onto a petri dish.
Javascript sounds smooth and consonant.
The cultural energy could work in tbe opposite direction but not this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Just call it HavaScript.
Generic? Really? (Score:2)
and we'll start discovery to show how 'JavaScript' is widely recognized as a generic term
But is it a generic term? It is only ever used to refer to that specific language.
Re: (Score:2)
This is probably a case of the legal terminology differing from common usage: i.e. the claim is that it's "generic" because it refers primarily to a product which is not owned or controlled by the holder of the trademark.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it does not even specify a concrete product at all. It is the generic concept of such a product, with existing products (implementations, e.g. interpreters) not being affiliated with Orache in any way, and I believe that is what the motion as such is about.
Re: (Score:2)
This is probably a case of the legal terminology differing from common usage: i.e. the claim is that it's "generic" because it refers primarily to a product which is not owned or controlled by the holder of the trademark.
Just because I have always called my locking pliers “Vice Grips” doesn’t mean I’m not explicitly referring to someone’s IP.
As much as I hate Oracle for their litigious bullshit, they might actually have a case here as the IP owner of Sun/Java. Doesn’t matter how popular or “generic” the use of the term “JavaScript” has become. It’s the same as my example.
Re: (Score:2)
This is probably a case of the legal terminology differing from common usage: i.e. the claim is that it's "generic" because it refers primarily to a product which is not owned or controlled by the holder of the trademark.
Just because I have always called my locking pliers “Vice Grips” doesn’t mean I’m not explicitly referring to someone’s IP.
As much as I hate Oracle for their litigious bullshit, they might actually have a case here as the IP owner of Sun/Java. Doesn’t matter how popular or “generic” the use of the term “JavaScript” has become. It’s the same as my example.
It's a well-established principle in trademark law, however, that if basically everyone uses the trademark term to refer to any old locking pliers, regardless of whether they're made by the owner of the trademark, then the trademark becomes invalid, and anyone can use it.
Re: (Score:2)
That is false.
Re: (Score:2)
Examples of "generic" in common use include medicine. You get "generic" Aspirin, however you don't expect to get chemotherapy drugs when you ask for Aspirin.
The same goes for trademarks. Vacuum is a generic name, but you don't expect to get a power saw when you order one. You expect to get a cleaning machine that sucks up
In the same way, "javascript" is generic. You don't expect to get an Oracle Javascript engine when you ask for "javascript" but you do expect that whatever you get will run the javascript /
Re: (Score:3)
Nitpick: Bayer didn't lose the "Aspirin" trademark because it was generic.
"Aspirin" was surrendered as part of the reparations for WW1.
Bayer lost the trademark for "Heroin" for the same reason.
Re: (Score:3)
I think “Vice Grips” and “Kleenex” are better generic-use examples here. Some people may have referred to locking pliers and tissues by the aforementioned names their entire lives. That hardly means the legal owners of those trademarked names do not still own them. Pay for that right regularly. Maintain that IP.
That is why “Java”Script has an uphill battle. Oracle isn’t exactly known for letting legal abuse slide. Quite the contrary. They built a fucking empi
Re: (Score:2)
Being a "generic" name in this situation means it isn't associated with a specific company or product.
When you think of "Windows" you probably tie it to Microsoft, who for a time risked losing the trademark for being generic. When you think of "Barbie" you probably think of the plastic doll from Mattel. When you think of "Superman" you probably think of the DC Comics character. When you think of "Big Mac" you probably think of a specific sandwich from McDonalds. They are strong marks associated with a spec
Re: Generic? Really? (Score:2)
Oracle Javascript, Deno Javascript, CmsrTacoJavascript and so on
Moving on... (Score:1)
Just chuck the whole thing and create universal support for script type="text/x-python".
Then I only need to know one programming language.
Re: (Score:3)
IME learning the core of a language is the easy bit. Its learning the libraries and how to use them correctly thats the hard part.
I think the 'Ayes' have it. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
"The Irish and the Scots don't speak it,"
You what? Of course they do. Don't confuse the dialects of English spoken in ireland and scotland with gaelic , its an entirely different language. There is scots too which branched off from old english but its pretty much extinct these days except in old texts such as by Robert Burns.
Re: (Score:2)
There is scots too which branched off from old english but its pretty much extinct these days except in old texts such as by Robert Burns.
Arguably modern Glaswegian and much of what is spoken in parts of the Highlands are actually dialects of Scots which have converged with English through taking on loan words and some grammar structures rather than dialects of English. In that sense Scots is in no way dead. The average English speaker cannot communicate effectively with a monolingual Glaswegian speaking road worker (though the road worker probably fully understands what they are saying if they want to - a bit like it turns out the French can
Re: (Score:2)
Glaswegian can be a bit tricky, but thats mainly the thick accent, not the words. Its no different to a heavy yorkshire dialect though these days you'd be hard pressed to find one.
Re: (Score:3)
The lnguage as well as the name were actually created by Netscape (nowadays "Mozilla") Java was owned by Sun who were not enthusiastic about "JavaScript" but did no more than point out occasionally that JS was not Java (and not even related). I wonder how the hell Oracle came up with the idea they had any rights on it
Re: (Score:3)
You need a history lesson.
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. (December 4, 1995) -- Netscape Communications Corporation (NASDAQ: NSCP) and Sun Microsystems, Inc. (NASDAQ:SUNW), today announced JavaScript, an open, cross-platform object scripting language for the creation and customization of applications on enterprise networks and the Internet. The JavaScript language complements Java, Sun's industry-leading object-oriented, cross-platform programming language. The initial version of JavaScript is available now as part o
Hoover (Score:2)
It's little different than what happened to the Hoover trademark: one talks of hoovering with a hoover no matter which company manufactures said hoover. The difficulty of getting everybody to use a different name to refer to ECMAScript shows how generic it's become.
Re: (Score:2)
In Yankland, maybe.
Here we've always called it a vacuum cleaner.
Re: (Score:3)
Vacuum is much more common recently but I definitely remember Hoover as the normal word in the UK and the case was strong enough for them to lose their trademark [itkmagazine.com] so I don't think that was an exception.
Re: Hoover (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Americans seldom use the term hoovering. That is some Limey terminology. In the states we use the term vacuum/vacuuming.
As long as I can still make a cup of joe ... (Score:1)
... by following a script that includes heating it on a computer, I'm good to go
what does consensus have to do with law? (Score:2)
"There is broad industry and public consensus that the term "JavaScript" is generic."
Is there? And why does that matter? Did Xerox lose it's copyright because the public used its name to refer to copy machines?
Javanco (Score:4, Interesting)
Stupid co-marketing tricks (Score:2)
In other news (Score:2)
Oracle is suing Greece for the usage of the name Oracle of Delphi....
*We cannot let this blatant trademark infringiment stand*, statement of Larry Ass***lisson PR Spokesperson of Oracle!
If only Sun had been litigious motherfuckers (Score:2)
I am completely convinced that the name really was chosen to be deliberately confusing with Java. This is clearly a trademark violation .. in 1996.
But apparently nobody cared. IMHO the only real defense people have against Oracle on this (but it's a good one!) is that the trademark went at least a decade and a half completely unenforced, and it's too late for the trademark holder to change their minds now.
If I introduce a product called "Sloppy Pepsi" then Pepsi will have a valid complaint. But if they don'
Rename it to OSScript (Score:2)
Easy fix. Rename it to OSS or "Oracle Sucks Script" and let them live with that as a trivia fact for the next few decades. Its easy to remember and may teach bit companies to be careful when they try to dictate.
Deno, ECMAScript .. (Score:2)