More seriously, it is something that Google should have done some due diligence on. Maybe they could have googled it?
Leonardo Aranda
· 3 weeks ago
"Lets Go!"? Seriously? I guess this programming language failed to become popular because of its inability to handle apostrophes in strings.
Greene Consulting
· 3 weeks ago
The book is his copy right .. . its like if you have an idea and write it down on a paper fold it and mail it to you self it gets a postal date and time stamp its a poor man copy right. Google could try but i think it would hard for court to let them take it with out some compensation of cash to the guy.
RB
· 3 weeks ago
Newsflash: Ideas are NOT covered under copyright law. That is what patents are for.
U.S.C. 17 ยง 102: "In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."
Anyway, poor man's copyright is a joke. Anything work you create is copyrighted, regardless of whether it is published or whether it contains a copyright notice.
Tim Acheson
· 3 weeks ago
Google's corporate machine is too big to notice or care about somebody like Frank McCabe. They're much more interested in the PR they can get by promising a new programming language.
Google's greatest commercial rival, Microsoft, has developed many of the world's most popular and important programming languages over the years. Google is playing catch-up again.
Do we really need another programming language from Google? Not really. Google still seems to think Python is the best language for web development. Perhaps the folks at Google could benefit from a new programming language.
Erik
· 3 weeks ago
Well, Google's not *trying* to make just another language. They have some goals for it, and if they can achieve them, it would be innovative and help many people.
Tim Acheson
· 3 weeks ago
I take your point. I welcome any new technology.
To quote Google's own blog post about the goals of "Go":
"the development speed of working in a dynamic [scripting] language like Python with the performance and safety of a compiled [real programming] language"
Microsoft already offers both dynamic and compiled languages, and a combination of both. In fact, the .NET CLR already allows you to write in Python and compile it just like C#. But I'd rather use C# because it's a nice clear language. It's a myth that it's faster or easier to code in Python. (In fact, Visual Studio and resharper write most of my code for me predictively.)
I'll try "Go" out of academic interest if it gets past the stage of being an experimental language. I'm a developer myself, so I need a whole lot more than just a programming language. I want substantial frameworks and development tools, as I get amply from .NET and SQL Server, and to some extent from J2EE and Oracle.
Maryam Al Kamali
· 3 weeks ago
trademarked or not i don't think they should use the same name anymore, its simply unfair!
pranman
· 3 weeks ago
and confusing...
Meltdown
· 3 weeks ago
Wouldn't it be better if they just changed the name to "goo"..the "goo" that holds everything together :-)
Mxx
· 3 weeks ago
there is already lang called 'goo'
Dave Nattriss
· 3 weeks ago
Unless he trademarked it I don't think he has any legal right to the name. Assuming he didn't, he was 'careless' not to bother.
Actually, Cisco had the iPhone trademark. No trademark means no rights.
r0cketman22
· 3 weeks ago
Who is arguing that? In my very first post I said that someone else owned the rights to the iPhone name. Wow.
Number 2, we don't live in a "no trademark no rights" system.
Xofis
· 3 weeks ago
Incorrect. The day he began using it commercially, he acquired a common law mark.
Dave Pearson
· 3 weeks ago
Oh please! Evil? Google's Go (which is a crap name for a language) started life as an internal 20% project and they've decided to "release" it. Probably in a pretty ad-hoc way. Seems like a pretty clear case for the application of Hanlon's Razor to me.
Stan_Schroeder
· 3 weeks ago
Heh, thanks for Hanlon's Razor. Haven't heard of it before. I'll add it to my collection of razors (;
Thanks for the link very amusing stuff. Yes they should definitely change it.
Pascual Cora Jr.
· 3 weeks ago
I do not see what the problem is here? Did he have a trademark for the language? Why didnt he? That is one of the purposes of trademark.... to let other people or company know that you hold the rights to a name....
I love how something this irrelevant happens and immediately everybody points the finger @ Google. And please Dont give me the sad puppy face BS of "i do not have money to hire a lawyer for this" Im pretty sure there are lawyers out there lining up to take this one.
Dont get me wrong the guy came up with the name first andeven though he did not take the proper steps to protect his trademark im pretty sure Google will find a fix for this problem.
Brian
· 3 weeks ago
"irrelevant" being the key word: No one heard of the other guy's language until Google used the same name and suddenly we're supposed to care.
MY STADY
· 3 weeks ago
The problem with sites like Mashable that copy their news from other sources is that you don't get the full story.
In comment 300, McCabe addresses the suggestion that he should just let Google use the name and benefit from increased search attention that his Go! language will receive as a result. "My response to that is that I was not actively looking for this advertising," he wrote. "It was not me who picked a clashing name."
David Neubauer
· 3 weeks ago
Maybe they'll change the name to Goo? :)
fla030
· 3 weeks ago
Come play with google's goo
Ixtapa
· 3 weeks ago
Actually Google will probably rename it Issue9 , as a reference the issue number nine raised by McCabe on the issue tracker of Google Go Programming Language. This is at least what a lot of people want to believe !
Trevor Evans
· 3 weeks ago
Anyone else find it ironic that a company whose goal it is to centralize all the world's information did not know that a programming language with the same name already existed? You'd think they would, you know, "google" it or something...
MY STADY
· 3 weeks ago
Yes. More than half the people that learn about Issue9 find that ironic.
Shaquille Ray
· 3 weeks ago
Google seems to be a little mean, and careless on this. You would think they would of really researched it, esp if their is a book based on it. Unless google doesn't change the name or make a deal, if i where the little guy, massive law suit
I wonder what will happen now. Google with their FAKE "do no evil" policy will sue the guy, just like they sued people for the name Gmail.
Google is EVIL!!!
Breaking news - Google has just faked the term evil to "microsoft"
Brian
· 3 weeks ago
Sure, the little guy shouldn't be Steamrolled by Google, but at the same time "Go" is such a common word, it should be expected. There also used to be a used car place in colorado called "Go" or something, there's also a board game called "Go". No one is going to just say "I'm programming in Go", most likely, they'd put Google in front of it. Google Wave is a good example, no one says just "wave", and there's others using the same protocol, we call it Google Wave.
rommy
· 3 weeks ago
uh...Google has no responsibility to the little guy if the little guy didn't take time to trademark it.
mytweetmark
· 3 weeks ago
That's pretty cool that they are planning to use it for chrome OS.
Google just did more to sell this guys book, than the original content of the book did. His language went nowhere, just as "Go" (Google version) is likely to go nowhere.
joeconflo
· 3 weeks ago
"After all, how many names are taken when it comes to programming languages? Perhaps a couple hundred?"
Bull.
Miguel
· 3 weeks ago
Well, this language is called "Go!" not "Go", think of it like "C", "C++" and "C#"
Maurice Walshe
· 3 weeks ago
Yes however Cisco ha a trademark on the iPhone
Taras Kiseliuk
· 3 weeks ago
They should have googled it =)
Old Git
· 3 weeks ago
That must be embarrassing for Google
el7cosmos
· 3 weeks ago
what? a company like google can miss this??
Jorge Fiffe
· 3 weeks ago
I think the only thing that Google can do is (1) offer to pay a vast amount of money to this guy to help rebrand his language code to "Let's Go" and (2) hope that he is so happy with how they fixed their mistake that he begins to laud how awesome Google's Go is.
Anonymous
· 3 weeks ago
1. Mashable is clearly not very technical. They're days late and the only aspect of the language they care about is the easy part for them to understand--naming. Clearly shows the caliber of this site again.
2. Google should just call the language Golang as they have the domain golang.com/.net/.org already anways. Kinda like how Erlang is Ericcson Language.
[SOLVED] Chris
· 3 weeks ago
[SOLVED] Rename to .Go or Go# :)
Anand
· 3 weeks ago
Now that Go's taken, let's call is Ogle...
abee
· 3 weeks ago
whoa...should google changes the name then??
Nick
· 3 weeks ago
I never heard of 'Go!' before this. oO
SteveMcQwark
· 1 week ago
I wonder how many people knew about Go! before this whole thing surfaced... I mean, where do you draw the line on naming claims? No trademark and no notability/brand recognition makes it hard to see where McCabe gets the right to hold the rights to the use of a common two letter word.
Oh well, its probably for the best that Google changes it, even just to Golang. Golang works, the problem is Google Golang doesn't sound so good...
John1111
· 3 weeks ago
Google already heavily uses Java internally and in all of their software releases to developers. What's the point in this new language again?
Google seems to have forgotten about the mantra: Don't over-extend yourself.
SteveMcQwark
· 1 week ago
Erm, since when was that their mantra. And the reasons are to mend many of the typical roadblocks that usually slow down development, including compile time, run time, awkward syntax and structure for common tasks, and garbage collection.
There is another program language named Simple as well. Google it!
darylteo
· 3 weeks ago
Gopher sounds better anyway.
Jean
· 3 weeks ago
If I were Google I'd just email his ass and say "Yeah, we're steamrolling you lol." and he'd just be sitting there feeling stupid for the rest of his life. End of story.
bcpk
· 3 weeks ago
Maybe they ignored him because he could differentiate between "let's" and "lets". Maybe he let go of the rights to Go?
Anon
· 3 weeks ago
There's already a programming language called "C", Microsoft should immediately change the name of their language, "C".
Oh right, one's called "C#" and "C", kinda like "Go" and "Go!". Things sounds much worse when you ignore these little details, don't they?
NewBossSameAsTheOldBoss
· 3 weeks ago
Apparently they hired some crappy researchers who don't know how to use their own product... if you search on: programming language go -google And then look past the new articles still about Google, you end up at McCabe's Go language before anything else.
SteveMcQwark
· 1 week ago
No it doesn't... and by now, his hit/trackback list will have jumped a lot anyways. Search results are dynamic, you know...
e cigarette
· 3 weeks ago
Oh man this sucks... I hope google will respect his request.
Eric Munson
· 3 weeks ago
They should have called it "Goo." After all, they are not called "Gogle."
SteveMcQwark
· 1 week ago
Your assertion that there aren't all that many language names taken, making having an overlap even more callous/careless demonstrates your fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject.
There are thousands of programming languages out there, not hundreds. Most of these never made it past personal toy or a few papers or other simple documents. Go! basked in obscurity and didn't show up in any reasonable way in search results until the author complained and brought it into the spotlight.
Looking at McCabe's behaviour on issue 9, he doesn't really deserve any courtesy. He is acting like Google stole from him, or intentionally wronged him, when his language was pretty much unknown to anyone but himself, and the name is by no means inventive, and his behaviour has been unwarrantedly disrespectful and immature. No matter what name Google picks, if it is a word, letter or phrase in the English language that is appropriate, chances are there's someone's obscure pet project language out there with that name already. However, the nice thing to do would be to humour McCabe's vanity, and besides, Go, while appropriate, is a really ambiguous name, as demonstrated by this fiasco. Using Golang as the official name, or something along those lines, would probably be better for Google anyway.
All Comments
More seriously, it is something that Google should have done some due diligence on. Maybe they could have googled it?
U.S.C. 17 ยง 102: "In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."
Anyway, poor man's copyright is a joke. Anything work you create is copyrighted, regardless of whether it is published or whether it contains a copyright notice.
Google's greatest commercial rival, Microsoft, has developed many of the world's most popular and important programming languages over the years. Google is playing catch-up again.
Do we really need another programming language from Google? Not really. Google still seems to think Python is the best language for web development. Perhaps the folks at Google could benefit from a new programming language.
To quote Google's own blog post about the goals of "Go":
"the development speed of working in a dynamic [scripting] language like Python with the performance and safety of a compiled [real programming] language"
Microsoft already offers both dynamic and compiled languages, and a combination of both. In fact, the .NET CLR already allows you to write in Python and compile it just like C#. But I'd rather use C# because it's a nice clear language. It's a myth that it's faster or easier to code in Python. (In fact, Visual Studio and resharper write most of my code for me predictively.)
I'll try "Go" out of academic interest if it gets past the stage of being an experimental language. I'm a developer myself, so I need a whole lot more than just a programming language. I want substantial frameworks and development tools, as I get amply from .NET and SQL Server, and to some extent from J2EE and Oracle.
Google has a cute reason to call it 'Go' - see the FAQ: http://golang.org/doc/go_faq.html#What_is_the_o...
Oh, and there's nothing that actually ties the new Go language to Google on their website, apart from saying that it's used on Google servers.
This is like that time when Apple introduced the iPhone when someone else already owned the name. That didn't stop them. haha
Steamrolling the little guy, sounds evil (if only mildly so) to me
Side note: Apple's used to be "Think different." haha
Cisco does own "iPhone" trademark and Apple licenses it from them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_iPhone#App...
Number 2, we don't live in a "no trademark no rights" system.
I love how something this irrelevant happens and immediately everybody points the finger @ Google. And please Dont give me the sad puppy face BS of "i do not have money to hire a lawyer for this" Im pretty sure there are lawyers out there lining up to take this one.
Dont get me wrong the guy came up with the name first andeven though he did not take the proper steps to protect his trademark im pretty sure Google will find a fix for this problem.
Go to the original story:
http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/we...
Quote:
In comment 300, McCabe addresses the suggestion that he should just let Google use the name and benefit from increased search attention that his Go! language will receive as a result. "My response to that is that I was not actively looking for this advertising," he wrote. "It was not me who picked a clashing name."
Links:
http://www.twitter.com/ateensblog
http://www.twitter.com/shaquille110
http://www.ateensblog.com
Google is EVIL!!!
Breaking news - Google has just faked the term evil to "microsoft"
Cheers,
mytweetmark.com
Bull.
2. Google should just call the language Golang as they have the domain golang.com/.net/.org already anways. Kinda like how Erlang is Ericcson Language.
:)
Oh well, its probably for the best that Google changes it, even just to Golang. Golang works, the problem is Google Golang doesn't sound so good...
Google seems to have forgotten about the mantra: Don't over-extend yourself.
RT
www.ultimate-privacy.cz.tc
Oh right, one's called "C#" and "C", kinda like "Go" and "Go!". Things sounds much worse when you ignore these little details, don't they?
And then look past the new articles still about Google, you end up at McCabe's Go language before anything else.
There are thousands of programming languages out there, not hundreds. Most of these never made it past personal toy or a few papers or other simple documents. Go! basked in obscurity and didn't show up in any reasonable way in search results until the author complained and brought it into the spotlight.
Looking at McCabe's behaviour on issue 9, he doesn't really deserve any courtesy. He is acting like Google stole from him, or intentionally wronged him, when his language was pretty much unknown to anyone but himself, and the name is by no means inventive, and his behaviour has been unwarrantedly disrespectful and immature. No matter what name Google picks, if it is a word, letter or phrase in the English language that is appropriate, chances are there's someone's obscure pet project language out there with that name already. However, the nice thing to do would be to humour McCabe's vanity, and besides, Go, while appropriate, is a really ambiguous name, as demonstrated by this fiasco. Using Golang as the official name, or something along those lines, would probably be better for Google anyway.