The timing of this is hilarious: https://twitter.com/chatsidhartha/status/1649484240952721408
Oracle just sent a legal threat to "Rust for Javascript" to remove "Javascript" from their name. (Oracle owns the "Javascript" trademark.)
Oracle just sent a legal threat to "Rust for Javascript" to remove "Javascript" from their name. (Oracle owns the "Javascript" trademark.)
IANAL, but if I recall correctly part of having a trademark is having a legal obligation to enforce it, and if I'm reading the tweet correctly this is a name of a company and typically one cannot use a trademark in their company name.
Oracle can grant others the use of their trademark legally, right? There's no reason Oracle couldn't say this?
> JavaScript is our trademark, you must either stop using it immediately OR <sign this online form here> to enter into an agreement with us that grants you the ability to use it, for as long as you please, no strings attached, no payment required.
Correct, with certain limitation[1]. This fact is why saying "but we have to do this or lose our trademark" is a bit disingenuous. You do have to actively defend your trademark or lose it (because a trademark is not intended to benefit the company holding it, it's intended as a consumer protection measure). But "defending your trademark" doesn't mean you have to engage in a lawsuit.
[1] The limitations are around the purpose of trademark as consumer protection measure. The idea is that consumers can rely on the trademark as a guarantee that a product or service is coming from who they think it's coming from. It's possible to be so liberal in licensing the use of your trademark out that it gets diluted enough to risk losing the registration.
Bullshit.
As a Reddit comment pointed out, they sent the legal notice because the person had Javascript in their Limited Company, not because they were selling a Javascript course. You can't create a Limited company violanting someone's trademark.
And in fact there are dozens of Javascript courses online