Matter Labs, the driving force behind the development of Ethereum's zkSync layer-2 network, made a significant announcement on June 2nd, signaling a shift in their approach to trademarking. They revealed their decision to withdraw all trademark applications pertaining to the term "zero-knowledge (ZK)." This pivotal move came on the heels of intense scrutiny and widespread criticism the company faced after its attempt to trademark the ZK term.

The uproar stemmed from a joint statement issued by prominent figures in the blockchain industry, including Sandeep Nailwal and Brendan Farmer, co-founders of Polygon, Eli Ben-Sasson, CEO of StarkWare, Tiancheng Xie, co-founder of Polyhedra Network, and Shafi Goldwasser, a distinguished recipient of the Turing Award. These experts vehemently opposed Matter Labs' endeavor to claim ownership over a concept they deemed a public good. They argued that the essence of ZK technology, which enables privacy-preserving transactions and verifications, should remain freely accessible to all, and any attempt to monopolize it contradicted the fundamental principles of decentralization and inclusivity cherished by the crypto community.

In response to the mounting pressure from these industry heavyweights and the broader community, Matter Labs opted to retract its trademark applications. In an official statement, the company expressed gratitude for the constructive dialogue and acknowledged the validity of the concerns raised. Matter Labs' CEO, Alex Gluchowski, underscored the complexity of the decision, acknowledging the inherent legal risks but emphasizing the greater purpose behind ZK technology. He articulated that the primary objective of ZK was to foster trust and integrity in collaborative efforts, transcending the traditional paradigm of "don't be evil" to one where malevolent actions are rendered impossible.

However, despite Matter Labs' public declaration, the trademark application status for the ZK term remained unchanged on the US Patent and Trademark Office website. The application, filed on February 27, had met the minimum filing requirements but had yet to be assigned to an examiner, indicating that the legal process was still in motion. This incongruity underscored the ongoing complexity surrounding intellectual property rights in the rapidly evolving landscape of blockchain technology.