Oracle, it's time to free JavaScript | Hacker News Reader

Oracle, it's time to free JavaScript

javascript.tm

277 pointsjeremiahlee125 comments

This is a stupid non-issue. You can go ahead and call it JavaScript despite what Oracle does or doesn't say.

Better yet, though: don't call it JavaScript—call it JS. "JavaScript" is and always was a dumb name. "JS" is not only fine, but better—and not because "JS" is particularly good, but because "JavaScript" itself isn't exactly hard to beat.

The only thing left to do is for the spec authors (which includes signatories to this petition) and the rest of TC-39 to say so; the next edition of ECMA-262 should modify the existing disclaimer in the preface about "JavaScript" being an Oracle trademark to state unequivocally that "JavaScript"—an unfortunate vestige of an ill-considered marketing decision in the 1900s—is a deprecated way to refer to the language not otherwise terribly well-known as ECMAScript and that the recommended way to refer to it is simply as "JS".

There is nothing better about "JS" over "JavaScript".

Wrong, and that's not the question, anyway.

There is nothing worse about "JS" over "JavaScript".

(Whereas the reverse is not true—there is something worse about "JavaScript" over "JS". Several somethings.)

"JavaSciript" implies it's some scripting language related to Java, which was originally an idea, where it was meant to control Java Applets. But that is not a thing anymore. Thus the name makes no sense. "JS" is just a name only conflicting with my initials.

The name was exclusively chosen based on marketing considerations, to have it benefit from the Java hype of the time. It was actually called LiveScript before.

They succeeded though

but "JS" implies it is some sort of amalgam of the J and S programming languages - or it doesn't and probably the Java implication doesn't exist anymore either - who really, on hearing the name in a modern context is going to think "hey, it must be a scripting version of that one really old programming language granddad in the office is always reminiscing about"?

... do you think people don't use Java anymore?

sure they use it, but I sort of feel the groups that use it and JavaScript are no longer likely to cross over each other, and thus new devs will not be making the historical mistake of rhetorical misunderstanding that was made in the old days.

Full stack developers often use both Java and JavaScript.

We can avoid your initials conflicting with anything by abbreviating your name to “JavaScript” now that is available.

javascript is an oracle registered trademark, js isn't

It works well as a modifier, and makes it easy to search for projects that are named after other common concepts or objects. It's also easy and natural- sounding to say for English speakers. Compared to other modifiers, it's more like "-dot-com" than "-lang", or even worse "libre-".

There are at least 3 things better about JS over JavaScript.

It’s smaller. The logo already just says JS. It doesn’t boost Java’s reputation. And people in the ecosystem don’t have to worry about oracle threatening them.

Makes me wonder if there are rules to use area names for your brands. Can I start Tennesseescript ?

this is an interesting angle. maybe the js luminaries signing this open letter can get support from the government in jakarta. i didn't realize this, but a hundred and fifty-six million people live in literal java

early adopters of java-RT

Isn't the technical name ECMAScript?

What would be really cool is if the community could just rally around the original name, LiveScript… it never had anything to do with Java, let that go…

i don't think oracle does anything in order to earn goodwill or because it's the right thing. they're structurally immune to moral suasion. don't forget that oracle was the company that sued google for the independent reimplementation of java they used in android. if you want oracle to do something, you either need to offer them a lot of money or level an extremely credible, well-financed legal threat at them

as agumonkey implicitly points out in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41559110, though, 'java' is the name of the world's most popular island. i wonder if the indonesian government could be persuaded to support the trademark revocation

“It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity! Or remorse or fear and it absolutely will not stop!... ever... until you are dead!”

I don't think your death stops them from going after your estate.

Iceland the country won its trademark case agains Iceland the supermarket chain so there is probably something to it.

EUIPO "[Iceland Supermarket] cannot reasonably trademark the name of a country that has been around since the 9th century".

I didn't know that was decided, and was just catching up on it now. This was a fun read:

> Mr Walker and other high-level executives from Iceland (the supermarket), took an emergency delegation to Iceland (the country), where they were met with a cold shoulder.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-13/iceland-country-secur...

Most /populous/ island is what I presume you mean.

yes, thank you, that was a stupid mistake on my part!

"Don't anthropomorphise the lawnmower[0]"

— Brian Cantrill on Larry Ellison, USENIX 2011

  [0] https://youtu.be/-zRN7XLCRhc?feature=shared&t=2115

It wasn't really a java implementation - they used the APIs, but broke compatibility.

Oh, I wasn't aware of that - what did they change?

The ability to launch a jar?

to me this sounds like a claim that gcc on linux isn't really a c compiler because linux can't run a .com file compiled with turbo c for ms-dos

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write_once,_run_anywhere

Geez, not this shit again. (One of the many ways you could tell Oracle was doomed in trying to find and convincingly argue a tenable position against Google: half the people half the time argued that Google should be sued for implementing Java, and the other half the time argued that they should be sued for not implementing Java.)

If you can't run jars, it's not a java implementation.

You mean zip files with a jar extension?

Yes the external format of a jar file is a zip - but there is also a specification for the internal structure and file formats, as well as information like the minimum java version required to execute (and all sorts of other crap, I can't really say since I haven't actually looked - these are just some sane enough minimums).

But anyway, no need to be snide.

They're clinging to it because of the "java" part, not the "script" part.

And they'll hold on to that tightly.

The most manifest example of this is simply what they made the Eclipse org jump through when they dropped, now, "Jakarta" EE. That was not a small rock in the Java pond at the time when we had to go through the Great Renaming.

But they did it anyway because the packages used to be named "javax", and Oracle was not going to let that go.

IIRC it was also because the Eclipse community didn’t want to go through the Java Enhancement Process which the javax name is tied to.

> That was not a small rock in the Java pond at the time when we had to go through the Great Renaming.

Haha. It still hasn't ended actually.

Slowly all the old software that supported only java ee are now (nearing) EOL.

Only recently I've seen teams planning and preparing for the "move".

People falling in the ages old trap of antropormophizing Oracle executives.

Have you seen Larry lately? How do you look like that at 80 years old? He must be a cyborg.

I heard that blood transfusion in Switzerland clinics, using blood of young healthy people of course, works pretty well.

He can afford the top-shelf blood boys

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Ellison#Health

He abstains from alcohol and drugs, maybe?

> Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphising Larry Ellison. You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower hates me' -- lawnmower doesn't give a shit about you, lawnmower can't hate you. Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmower. Don't fall into that trap about Oracle. — Brian Cantrill (https://youtu.be/-zRN7XLCRhc?t=33m1s)

For those unfamiliar. Worth a watch.

Does Oracle actually defend it? Isn't the rule behind a trademark that you actually need to enforce it?

VELCRO(r) has this song about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRi8LptvFZY

Edit: as I watched the video again I finally caught on the fact that RollerBlades are a brand of inline-skates. In Belgium we called them inline-skates.

It's interesting to see how brands-as-identifiers change based on language and countries. My Walloon friend calls tape Scotch, but I don't.

I just noticed that that video has a copyright notice at the end for Velcro BVBA (which I think is Belgian). Apparently it's a swiss invention. I had always assumed velcro was an American company, because in my language we don't say velcro either.

Tangent, but in Poland these are called "Iceskaterollers" (łyżworolki). Now I wonder how my mother tongue compares to, say, English in terms of gzip compression efficiency.

Unfortunately yes, they'll send you a C&D if you pop up on an Oracle lawyer's radar. A coworker of mine had a course named "Rust for JavaScript developers" and received a C&D from Oracle.

There’s lots of colloquially used names by the general public that technically infringe trademark.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_generici...

“Aspirin”, “elevators”, “laundromat” are just a few examples.

Even “App Store” was trademarked (by Apple).

I think in the case of app store, that's suitably generic that someone with money could easily fight it.

Well done stuff probably is not enforceable, like App Store. That is too generic

I'm not sure - trademark law is tricky - "The Container Store" is trademarked (and while you might say "App Store" is too generic, but I don't recall the term existing prior to "The App Store", so this might be a "Hoover" or similar situation).

I remember McDonald's used[?] to have "All Beef" as a trademark for their burger patties (I also recall them getting in trouble in NZ as just because they're "All Beef" brand doesn't mean you can advertise them as "All Beef Patties" in a way that is clearly intended to imply they're "all beef")

App Store is not the same case as Hoover because the name is a literal description of what it is. It’s like a coffee producer trademarking the name Coffee.

Like Apple suing over trademark to an apple fruit producer.

https://www.wired.com/story/apple-vs-apples-trademark-battle...

I had no idea Heroin was originally a trademarked cough suppressant.

As you might expect, it's an exceptionally effective cough suppressant.

The general public can't infringe a trademark unless they're selling a competing product ;) Interestingly, Aspirin becoming a generic term in many countries was more of a result of WW1 as the allied powers seized various things from German companies (like Bayer) for war reparations, including intellectual property like trademarks. It was technically purchased by an American company for use in the US after the war, but I guess they didn't defend the mark very well and it quickly fell into genericism.

Genericization is by definition not infringement.

The letter makes points that the trademark is already abandoned. I'm not familiar with trademark laws, but if the trademark is already abandoned, why the need for the letter?

Abandoned as in "they aren't using it", but they do keep renewing the trademark so they still hold it.

I have a domain name that I haven't used in years. I keep renewing it though, just in case.

Not the same thing. Trademark abandonment is a specific legal concept. You can apply for regular renewal of a trademark, but others can argue that you are not actually utilizing the tm. In this case, JavaScript is not legally abandoned but the letter argues it should be

Oracle's lawyers dutifully renew the trademark annually. Despite their lack of active use, this leaves the door open for future use. It creates a nebulous state where Oracle could choose to initiate a costly legal action against someone using the trademark.

One of those situations where the law can be on your side but the real problem is if you can afford the legal battle.

As the letter notes, Oracle has never actually taken any kind of action to keep people from using the name. They don't even make performative reminders. They know their claim on the mark is weak and they aren't going to waste a lot of lawyer time on it. But it's Oracle, so they won't willingly give up anything that might be worth more than a dime. This is just to note their continued non-action when the USPTO is asked to nullify the mark.

It will still cost whoever oracles decides to vindictively go after (driven by some unrelated dispute) a bunch of money and trouble.

Lawnmower is gonna lawn mow

Meanwhile, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41559829

JavaScript is a registered trademark. It would be easier for everyone if Oracle released the trademark registration than for the letter signers to file a legal petition requesting the USPTO cancel the registration.

The site explicitly says they tried to get Oracle to release the trademark before, and that this is their final attempt at doing so before filing wigh the USPTO.

It is practically abandoned, but unless the USPTO or a US court says that that is so, it is not legally abandoned. That is a problem because the confusion and insecurity about the trademark remains until it is legally considered abandoned.

That's why we need to file a petition with the US Patent and Trademark office.

In general, unenforced Trademarks are worthless, but prevent other people trademarking the name. Trademarks are regional, and must be registered in each country even if a part of WIPO.

Some countries, the trademarks are market sector specific, but in other places cover all use cases for the name/mark.

It is highly recommended to trademark commercial products/names in each country of import. Otherwise your company could end up getting sued/imports-seized by an opportunistic a*hole that does nothing except sneak copyright/trademark rights.

Oracle is smart, and will sit on the IP like any business person should.

Most people that complain about trademarks/copyright have never been ripped off for a few hundred thousand by import/customs rules, or had counterfeit products show up for warranty repairs/returns.

IP is messy for sure, but it is better to negotiate from a position of legal power asymmetry when dealing with unreasonable individuals. Some people are crazy... had a few cons harassing one of the engineers a long time back, and needed legal to politely "ask" them to find another hobby. =3

Oracle's claims to be making "use in commerce" of Javascript are listed here: [1]

There's a link to the non-Oracle page for node.js download, and to Oracle Javascript Extension Toolkit. Weak, but arguable.

[1] https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn75026640&docI...

I thought this was just another internet rant until I got to the bottom of the page:

> Sincerely,

> Ryan Dahl - creator of Node.js

> Brendan Eich - creator of JavaScript

> Michael Ficarra - editor of the JavaScript spec

> Rich Harris - creator of Svelte

> Isaac Z. Schlueter - creator of npm

> Feross Aboukhadijeh - CEO of Socket

> James M Snell - member of Node.js TSC

> Wes Bos - host of Syntax.fm

> Scott Tolinski - host of Syntax.fm

> and 191 more members of the JavaScript community

It is now 3k more members.

it's now 6,295 more members

> and it is causing widespread, unwarranted confusion and disruption

In what way? I don't see any immediate benefits.

All the official specs and working groups use different terms than what people colloquially use.

It's a bit similar to when people still call TLS "SSL" but that is for very different reasons.

The article kinda glossed over how Sun got the trademark: "As a result of this partnership...". What does "this" refer to? Using the same syntax?

It refers to the partnership between Netscape and Sun, per the beginning of that paragraph.

Ah, thanks.

Fun fact, prior to the partnership it was called LiveScript.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript#Creation_at_Netscap...

According to comments in this post, it appears that Oracle is defending the use of the name "JavaScript" in some cases. However, the internet is filled with various resources that use "JavaScript" in their names. I'm curious if there are any confirmed instances of Oracle suing someone for using this name, or if these are just false rumors and Oracle is merely reserving the right to do so in the future.

When JavaScript was introduced, Java was already gaining traction, and the name JavaScript was chosen to ride on the coattails of that popularity. From that perspective, there’s a pretty good argument in favor of whoever holds the Java trademark, which happens to be Oracle.

I have definitely run into people who say things like “they wrote a Java script”, which actually turned out to be a Java program.

Or maybe shall we all start calling it EcmaScript?

If anything to break with the old (IE6 and similar) javascripts that are still there, running somewhere.

What issues is this causing among developers? I personally think JS should be sunsetted and spun off as a set of 2nd gen languages like typescript and rust and Ecma. It is clear that Oracle is not working on JS. The browsers are. The w3c is(?). Let them coalesce onto a spin off version. Like WebScript.

It's long gone the time people should stop doing business with Oracle.

The HN title is wrong. The missing word significantly changes the meaning.

Oracle still uses Java though. You can't spell JavaScript without Java. Regardless, JavaScript is now much larger than Java, so the trademark for JS should at least revert to the public.

> Regardless, JavaScript is now much larger than Java

Curious, but in what way? Java still drive lots of enterprise and banks, and I cant' say I've seen any Node.js in the backend at any of these places.

JavaScript is the world's most popular programming language.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/793628/worldwide-develop...

That graph can't be right. Everyone knows it's a toss-up between Rust and Clojure. :)

That's a poor stats to be polite. SQL is no programming language, PL/SQL and its variants are. Without scripting languages you can't embed much logic in it.

I also wonder how they count multi users, I can easily mark 10 of those if not more.

> HTML/CSS were the most commonly used programming languages

I am sorry but that can't be taken seriously, then I know a ton of Excel developers, and wait till I get to Powerpoint ones.

Sorry, but the second largest "language" on that graph is HTML/CSS. I mean that's not even a programming language.

So ignore that entry

There are enough open source interpreters/engines. Let's fork it and call it WebPageScript.

I'd call it "JS"

I remember the day Netscape added "Javascript" and many people complained that the name was confusing because it had nothing at all to do with Java. It was especially confusing because people used to embed actual Java applications in webpages as "applets". It was a dumb marketing move right from the start and it has caused nothing but trouble ever since. It's way past time for the name to be changed.

Well.. ecmascript got a lot of marketing value from JavaScript and thus Java. If it was called something else it would’ve never become so big

I agree It is time to let JavaScript go

I do not mean the trademark

Oracle executives are scheduling a meeting right now just to read this letter together and laugh at it.

All jokes aside though, they don’t care, and frankly speaking, despite how much sense it makes for them to release the trademark, they have no reason to care.

To seriously move the needle on this issue, you need deep pockets and lawyers.

javascript should be renamed to LavaScript

sun microsystems - sun -> lava

java volcano -> lava

But in the latin alphabet, JavaScript begins with an I!

>GraalVM is far from a canonical JavaScript implementation; engines like V8, JavaScriptCore, and SpiderMonkey hold that role.

>you must dig into the documentation to find its support.

Okay but it’s in the documentation which ruins your whole “abandonment” argument.

Even still, they clearly have their own use of JavaScript, albeit not “canonical”, whatever the author meant by that bitter refutal.

I don’t really understand the argument either. GraalJS is an implementation of ES2023 with additional features from graal on top.

Just because its implementation wasn’t originally for a web browser makes it not “canonical”?

Maybe it's time to stop caring about such things entirely.

> JavaScript is the world’s most popular programming language

Is this really so?

I have the feeling this is 'popular' because there are no alternatives. Web is popular, this is just an accompanying disaster.

There was an argument about fragmentation so people didn't want more things as option. As an answer to that there were many (?) attempts to solve problems that come with JavaScript for years, anybody remember coffee script? The only one that worked is typescript. And typescript again transpiles to Javascript having worse performance and a bunch of limitations.

The only alternative that I saw that makes sense is dart and people crucified google for considering to include it in chromium. It is really a shame that this didn't get accepted.

> Is this really so? […] I have the feeling this is 'popular' because there are no alternatives

I think it's pretty clear that JavaScript is the most popular one. And yes, it's popular because in it's space it's without alternatives. But so was C for many environments. We can judge if that's fair or unfair, but it does not change the situation we have.

Maybe it's about the definition of the word 'popular'.

Dictionary.com:

1. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general

2. regarded with favor, approval, or affection by an acquaintance or acquaintances:

3. of, relating to, or representing the people, especially the common people:

4. of the people as a whole, especially of all citizens of a nation or state qualified to participate in an election:

5. prevailing among the people generally:

6. suited to or intended for the general masses of people:

7. adapted to the ordinary intelligence or taste:

8. suited to the means of ordinary people; not expensive:

I have always associated popular with definition 1. Let me ask differently: do people really like JavaScript or they like web and JavaScript is forced upon them since there are no alternatives (and they actually dislike/hate it)?

Well, there are alternatives. Many people user TypeScript (which then is compiled to JavaScript) or some other alternative. JavaScript is just a compiler artifact format.

With TeaVM you can compile Java to JavaScript and run it in the browser again. We've come full circle. https://teavm.org/

^ This.

Popular, but terrible.

In the GitHub [1] and TIOBE [2] language stats, Javascript is NOT the most popular language.

[1] https://madnight.github.io/githut/#/pull_requests/2024/1

[2] https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

1. https://octoverse.github.com/2022/top-programming-languages

2. https://innovationgraph.github.com/global-metrics/programmin...

> The only alternative that I saw that makes sense is dart

I do not think Dart was much of an improvement

When the tooling improves WASM is

JavaScript is just a name. The current language's official name, according to the specification defining that language, is ECMAScript. If the trademark is a problem then simply call it by a different name.

You clearly have not read the post :D

If you mean:

Brendan Eich, the creator of JavaScript and a co-signatory of this letter, wrote in 2006 that “ECMAScript was always an unwanted trade name that sounds like a skin disease.”

Then this is not a matter of trademark or identity. It is only a matter of marketing. If this is just a matter of trademark my comment remains equally valid. Just use a different name.

How many books and blog posts with "JavsScript" in the title are there? Several quadrillion is my guess.

"Why should I change? He's the one who sucks."

Oracle gets no real benefit from the trademark, and getting everyone to stop calling it JavaScript is basically impossible. It would be better for everyone for Oracle to just abandon the trademark.

I don't expect Oracle to actively release the trademark, but it would be better if they did.

Don't worry about other people. Just worry about yourself. It is either your problem or it isn't a problem at all.

The language was originally called Mocha, and when it first released to the public in Netscape it was called LiveScript. I recall that changing the name to JavaScript was quite controversial and unpopular at the time among geeks.

So when the geeks got to finally put the open standard out there they had a chance to fix this nonsense and take back the name! And they chose ECMAScript! .... wait they chose WHAT?!?

People will keep calling it JavaScript as it’s easier to say

Nobody likes "ECMAScript". What a dog's breakfast of a name. Is Webscript already taken? If not I vote for that. I guess those node weirdos who want to write commandline programs using it might complain, but I think we can afford to lose them.

Call it whatever you want. The name you pick is an irrelevant aside. That is why Microsoft used to call it JScript, because the name doesn't matter as long as its not that one protected name.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com