开源社区对技术垄断的抗争

Search documents
2 万程序员签名!Node.js 之父炮轰 Oracle,这事对行业有重大影响。网友直呼:它就是寄生虫
程序员的那些事· 2025-06-29 11:31
Core Viewpoint - The ongoing legal battle between Ryan Dahl, the creator of Node.js, and Oracle over the JavaScript trademark centers on the claims of generic use and abandonment of the trademark by Oracle, which has not actively used it in product development for years [5][28]. Group 1: Latest Developments - On June 18, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) dismissed the fraud claims against Oracle, which alleged that Oracle misled the USPTO by using Node.js website screenshots to prove the use of the JavaScript trademark [3][4]. - The focus of the case is now on the more critical claims of genericity and abandonment, with a deadline for Oracle to respond to the trademark cancellation application set for August 7 [5][7]. - As of the writing, over 20,455 individuals have supported the stance that JavaScript is not Oracle's product, highlighting the public interest in the case [8]. Group 2: Background of the Trademark Dispute - The trademark dispute traces back to 1995 when Sun Microsystems registered the JavaScript trademark during its collaboration with Netscape [14]. - Oracle acquired the trademark in 2009 through its purchase of Sun but has not utilized it in any significant product development, leading to claims of abandonment [15][18]. - In November 2024, Deno Land, founded by Ryan Dahl, filed a petition with the USPTO to revoke Oracle's ownership of the JavaScript trademark, citing generic use and lack of actual use over the past 15 years [12][22]. Group 3: Industry Impact and Underlying Issues - The trademark restrictions have led to confusion in the industry, with developers often using ECMAScript as the official name instead of JavaScript, which has hindered community events and led to legal threats from Oracle [25]. - Oracle's insistence on retaining the trademark is viewed as a legal deterrent, reflecting its historical approach to trademark enforcement, as seen in its lengthy litigation against Google over the Java trademark [26]. - The case represents a broader struggle between the open-source community and corporate control over technology, with Dahl asserting that JavaScript should be considered a public good rather than a corporate asset [27][29].