Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename due to trademark

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by jpambrun on Saturday January 30, 2016 @02:24PM (#11003310)

To be fair, I was rather confused when reading the title. I tough the original JADE was being sued. Now most Google results are related to new JADE lang. Obviously, there is a trademark issue. The fact that HN seems to like this new JADE more should be irrelevant. I am surprised to witness such a biased reaction here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by dang on Saturday January 30, 2016 @02:32PM (#11003333)

Ok, let's add "Node.js template engine" to the title. That's the project's self-description at https://github.com/pugjs/jade.

We also changed "lawsuit" to "trademark" in the title, since it's not clear that there's a lawsuit and it is clear that there's a trademark.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by jpambrun on Saturday January 30, 2016 @03:53PM (#11003694)

The title is much clearer now. However, the need for such adjustments sort of support the argument that the orignal JADE trademark needs to be enforced in order to prevent confusion.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by niftylettuce on Saturday January 30, 2016 @08:06PM (#11004721)

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11004716, hope they try to enforce that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by jpambrun on Saturday January 30, 2016 @08:23PM (#11004774)

I saw what you did. I don't think it is particularly productive nor mature. Aside from that, I don't care enough about either JADEs to contribute further to the debate.

Edit: I meant productive in the context of the current litigation. I am not supporting any side in this argument. I am, however, supporting the right of the JADE company to try to enforce their trademarks.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by niftylettuce on Saturday January 30, 2016 @08:49PM (#11004860)

It took 1 hour of my day to stand up for something. It was very productive, reminded me of how to setup CNAME's and domains very quickly for MVP's, and I made a lot of people laugh (and reckon that they too shouldn't give in to unenforcable nonsense like this, especially with trademarks that are ABANDONED). 2000+ NPM packages, 100's of blog posts, tons of references, and all this was going on for years. Are you really supporting these people? This isn't a debate, it's pure hilarity :).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by rodgerd on Saturday January 30, 2016 @02:42PM (#11003386)

Exactly - this is literally the correct use of trademark law. HN having a tantrum about it speaks poorly of the posters here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by niftylettuce on Saturday January 30, 2016 @02:53PM (#11003434)

No, it is not.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by korethr on Saturday January 30, 2016 @03:24PM (#11003581)

If the purpose and correct use of trademarks is not to be a legally-protected unique identifier to prevent confusion amongst products of the same type/class or in the same market, then what, pray tell, is it's correct use?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by curun1r on Saturday January 30, 2016 @03:43PM (#11003647)

The purpose of trademarks is to protect consumers, not companies.

From what I can tell about the trademark owner in this case, they make logistics software for shipping. I fail to see how a consumer could confuse that with an HTML template engine.

It's past time to recognize that 'software' is way too broad a category for a single trademark. As 'software eats the world' and more and more industries are automated, we need to break that down into more granular categories.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by jpambrun on Saturday January 30, 2016 @04:03PM (#11003732)

I don't know much about the original JADE company, but from their website "JADE 7 is a robust development platform for business applications" where programmes are written in the JADE language.

This is obviously an issue when searching for JADE tutorials or hiring JADE programming experts for instance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by curun1r on Saturday January 30, 2016 @05:51PM (#11004179)

Trademarks don't guarantee Google search results. They're supposed to protect against confusion on the part of the consumer. You don't have to be a genius to understand that an open source library isn't a commercial product.

This legal threat is solely because Jade, the trademark holder, is losing the popularity contest with Jade, the open source library. They're trying to buy their way to the top of Google search results with lawyers.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by niftylettuce on Saturday January 30, 2016 @07:58PM (#11004686)

Their trademarks in the US are at least abandoned - therefore not enforcable. In the UK I'm not sure how NZ TM law applies, or where Jade was originally created (Canada).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by ryanlol on Saturday January 30, 2016 @05:06PM (#11004003)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JADE_(programming_language)

Seems pretty likely to cause confusion.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by tomjen3 on Saturday January 30, 2016 @03:37PM (#11003629)

If it was, why would companies be allowed to sell/sub license trademarks without the underlying product?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jade, Node.js template engine, is being forced to rename ... by tomjen3 on Saturday January 30, 2016 @03:45PM (#11003655)

Not really - first the other jade doesn't do node templates and secondly jadejs has been around for quite some time, which would invalidate the other trademark.

[ Parent | on HN ]