zlacker

>>pavela+(OP)
Silly question: how are people negatively impacted by the trademark of "JavaScript"?

Because in practice, isn't this a bit like "Kleenex" - where everyone knows you mean "tissue" (EMCAScript).

>>albert+GK
It's less the fact that someone owns JS's trademark, and more that it's specifically Oracle (they got it when they bought Sun).

Oracle is an incredibly litigious company. Their awful reputation in this respect means that the JS ecosystem can never be sure they won't swoop in and attempt to demand rent someday. This is made worse by the army of lawyers they employ; even if they're completely in the wrong, whatever project they go after probably won't be able to afford a defense.

>>Stable+JM
That's why courts don't take hypothetical cases. Someone has to be injured to demonstrate actual harm.

Are there any examples of Oracle using their JavaScript trademark to sue anyone? If they did, that petition would have merit.

Unless Demo was, this feels like a marketing project. And it's working, too, so kudos.

>>levkk+jd1
It's the specter of a lawsuit that's the problem.