6 ms·
They are using the wrong tactics. They should use the "Kleenex" argument and say it's generic. But what do I know.
by sayrer 2y ago
They are using the wrong tactics. They should use the "Kleenex" argument and say it's generic. But what do I know.
- svieira 2y agoThey're doing both - the issue is that the fraud issue either gets dropped (which Ryan doesn't want to do) or it blocks the second "generic" issue until resolved. > Oracle waited until the deadline to file this motion, delaying their response to the real issue: whether “JavaScript” is a generic term. and > Oracle won’t even discuss whether “JavaScript” should remain a trademark until they’ve finished dragging out this fraud claim. > This legal maneuvering puts us in a difficult position: > 1. Agree to drop the fraud claim, letting them get away with misrepresenting their trademark renewal. > 2. Spend months fighting this procedural issue before even getting to the real debate.
- aardvarkr 2y agoBut they are… genericness is a key part of their argument. >Our petition challenges Oracle’s trademark on three grounds: >Genericness – JavaScript is a widely used programming language, not an Oracle product. >Abandonment – Oracle does not control, maintain, or enforce the trademark. >Fraud on the USPTO – Oracle submitted misleading evidence in its renewal filing.