Oracle’s Grip on the JavaScript Trademark: A Battle Few Know Exists

The legal battle over the validity of JavaScript as a trademark name is one that is probably known to few, despite its status as a top programming language with over 27 million users.

Perhaps this is because most developers assume that JavaScript is a freely available language managed by ECMA International and held to a high and open standard.

Yet the name remains a registered trademark that Oracle has quietly held onto for years.

This little-known fact resurfaced recently when the team behind Deno Land, a JavaScript runtime, clashed with Oracle over the trademark’s use.

Backed by a JavaScript community of over 16,000 members, Deno Land is urging the database giant to relinquish its claim on JavaScript for several reasons.

Techopedia explores the battle of words over a language. Will Oracle give up the Javascript trademark?

Table of Contents Table of Contents

1. Key Takeaways
2. Why Oracle's JavaScript Trademark is Being Challenged
3. Why Oracle Won't Let Go of The JavaScript Trademark
4. What is the Implication of Oracle's Ownership of JavaScript?
5. The Bottom Line
6. FAQs
7. References

Show Full Guide

Table of Contents

1. Key Takeaways
2. Why Oracle's JavaScript Trademark is Being Challenged
3. Why Oracle Won't Let Go of The JavaScript Trademark
Show Full Guide
4. What is the Implication of Oracle's Ownership of JavaScript?
5. The Bottom Line
6. FAQs
7. References

Why Oracle’s JavaScript Trademark is Being Challenged

Sun Microsystems owned the JavaScript trademark before Oracle acquired the company in 2009 — and, with it, gained the rights to the trademark.

However, after Oracle renewed its trademark in 2019, co-founder and CEO of Deno Land Inc. Ryan Dahl kicked off against Oracle’s right to own the mark.

The backlash began in 2022 when Dahl wrote an open letter to Oracle asking the giant to relinquish its trademark claim.

This was followed by another open letter to Oracle dated September 16, 2024, at https://javascript.tm/. This time, the letter was signed by numerous developers urging the database firm to give up the registration.

In a petition filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in November 2024, Deno Land argues that JavaScript has become a generic term widely used by millions of companies, developers, and academics to describe a programming language rather than a specific product tied to Oracle.

They also claim that Oracle has let the trademark gather dust for years, failing to use or actively enforce it in meaningful ways.

Perhaps the most striking accusation is that Oracle allegedly misled the USPTO when renewing the trademark in 2019 by submitting screenshots of Node.js — a runtime not owned by Oracle — as evidence of its usage.

To unpack the legal complexities surrounding the case, Techopedia spoke with Aman Gebru, assistant professor of law and an expert in trademark law at the University of Houston Law Center.

From a legal standpoint, Gebru explained that Oracle’s hold on the trademark could be revoked if it had not used the trademark name commercially.

He said:

“The trademark system is a use it or lose it model. If Oracle isn’t actively using “JavaScript” in commerce, and it’s on shaky ground. A dormant mark can be canceled for non-use.”

Why Oracle Won’t Let Go of The JavaScript Trademark

The recent development on this subject suggests that Oracle isn’t ready to let go of the trademark.

In a motion filed on February 3rd, the Austin, Texas-based tech giant insists it still uses the trademark for products like its JavaScript Extension Toolkit and argues that its ownership is legitimate.

“Oracle uses the JavaScript mark in connection with a variety of offerings, including its JavaScript Extension Toolkit as well as developer’s guides and educational resources, and also that relevant consumers do not perceive JavaScript as a generic term,” it wrote in response to Deno Land’s petition.

So Oracle is asking that Deno’s fraud claim be dismissed because it lacks sufficient evidence to meet the legal standards required for such allegations.

Reacting to the situation, Matthew Asbell, Intellectual Property Attorney at Lippes Mathias LLP, told Techopedia he understands why Oracle may want to hold onto the JavaScript name.

“One might justify Oracle’s desire to retain ownership because of the large family of JAVA trademark registrations in its portfolio. Giving up JavaScript could have more significant results for Oracle,” Asbell explained.

What is the Implication of Oracle’s Ownership of JavaScript?

While it’s not out of place to think that Deno Land and other developers are pursuing this case to avoid potential legal pitfalls that might arise from using the JavaScript name, Asbell of Lippes Mathias LLP suggests Oracle’s stance is likely less about the law and more about public perception.

He believes that while Oracle’s registration primarily covers software goods and services, and shouldn’t impact the use of “JavaScript” in contexts like conferences about the language itself, it creates an odd situation where a private entity like Oracle can restrict how the specification is referenced.

This raises the question of whether Oracle’s ownership could eventually lead to restrictions or influence over how the language evolves or is discussed, even if unintentionally.

This concern is echoed by Assistant Professor Gebru, who argues that Oracle’s control over the JavaScript trademark “can create public backlash against Oracle, especially given the strong open ethos in the software developer community.”

Gebru suggests that Oracle’s trademark ownership may discourage open collaboration and community building by creating an environment where developers fear potential legal repercussions for using the JavaScript name.

Gebru implies that this chilling effect stems not necessarily from Oracle’s actual legal victories but from the mere threat of litigation.

Gebru further explains this in detail, saying:

“There is a difference between trademark use and abuse. Even if Oracle holds the mark, fair use rules let people utilize JavaScript to refer to the product or the source of the product.

“This is a clear rule that’s been in the books for quite some time. But the threat of enforcement has a way of chilling effect in intimidating users, even if the claimant does not have a strong legal claim.”

The Bottom Line

Regardless of the legal outcome, this case highlights the tension between corporate ownership and open-source development.

Oracle’s pursuit of its trademark rights raises questions about the balance between protecting commercial interests and preserving the open nature of widely adopted technologies.

This case, along with similar disputes like one involving WordPress vs WP Engine, calls for clearer guidelines regarding trademark ownership in the open-source community.

FAQs