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