[marcus0x62]

Maybe. I'm not a lawyer, let alone an IP lawyer, but Netscape creating a programming language called "JavaScript" seems like the kind of thing that would be likely to cause confusion in the marketplace. Netscape explicitly chose the name to latch on to the popularity of Java at the time. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me for the Sun of 1997 to want to protect their interest in the Java name by licensing it to Netscape but controlling the underlying trademark.

[throw646577]

Netscape didn't just try to "latch onto" the popularity of Java.

Netscape _and_ Sun, together, called it JavaScript. The point was that the renamed language had rudimentary bindings that you could use to connect functionality in an HTML page with the applets embedded in it (which were effectively silo'd in HotJava)

https://web.archive.org/web/20070916144913/https://wp.netsca...

It was fully a partner decision.

Also, f***. I am old.

[angled]

That press release and the list of partner companies are amazing. Marc Benioff was the listed press contact for Oracle!

[marcus0x62]

Of course Sun was a willing participant. I didn't claim otherwise. Netscape wouldn't have been able to use the name without Sun's support.

[mananaysiempre]

I mean, yes, it’s a reasonable thing for Sun to want, but I (also not a lawyer) don’t see how it’s within the USPTO’s purview to grant. Sun/Oracle can claim others’ use of “JavaScript” is confusing others with regard to what “Java” is—indeed as you say this seems to have been Netscape’s explicit intent with the name—but that means Sun/Oracle may have some control over the use of the term “JavaScript” through their very real dealings in Java, not their nonexistent ones in JavaScript. You don’t get to squat trademarks, you have to use them. (Unless you have enough money to outlast any challenger in a legal battle. I guess we’ll see how that goes.)