They're doing both - the issue is that the fraud issue either gets dropped (which Ryan doesn't want to do) or it blocks the second "generic" issue until resolved.

> Oracle waited until the deadline to file this motion, delaying their response to the real issue: whether “JavaScript” is a generic term.

and

> Oracle won’t even discuss whether “JavaScript” should remain a trademark until they’ve finished dragging out this fraud claim.

> This legal maneuvering puts us in a difficult position:

> 1. Agree to drop the fraud claim, letting them get away with misrepresenting their trademark renewal.

> 2. Spend months fighting this procedural issue before even getting to the real debate.

But they are… genericness is a key part of their argument.

>Our petition challenges Oracle’s trademark on three grounds:

>Genericness – JavaScript is a widely used programming language, not an Oracle product.

>Abandonment – Oracle does not control, maintain, or enforce the trademark.

>Fraud on the USPTO – Oracle submitted misleading evidence in its renewal filing.