Comments on: More Thoughts on Today’s O’Reilly Media Web 2.0 Fiasco http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html Mon, 22 Mar 2010 04:07:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: ttrentham http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14429 ttrentham Tue, 30 May 2006 15:15:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14429 Well, now you've got your <a href="http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2006/05/web_20_service_mark_controvers.html" rel="nofollow">response from Tim</a>. I expect we'll see a post from you later today?<br /><br />Yours was the first mention of this that I saw (but not the last). My first reaction was "that sucks!", but then I saw another report that it applied only to the conference and that The Man himself was on vacation and unavailable for comment. I decided to reserve judgment and I think his response is satisfactory. It'll be interesting to see what he does after talking with CMP this week. Well, now you’ve got your response from Tim. I expect we’ll see a post from you later today?

Yours was the first mention of this that I saw (but not the last). My first reaction was “that sucks!”, but then I saw another report that it applied only to the conference and that The Man himself was on vacation and unavailable for comment. I decided to reserve judgment and I think his response is satisfactory. It’ll be interesting to see what he does after talking with CMP this week.

]]> By: Dale Sundstrom http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14430 Dale Sundstrom Tue, 30 May 2006 15:09:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14430 <b>A Kinder and Gentler Caption?</b><br /><br />And there's plenty of Kool-Aid in the back for everyone. A Kinder and Gentler Caption?

And there’s plenty of Kool-Aid in the back for everyone.

]]> By: Thomas Hawk http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14431 Thomas Hawk Tue, 30 May 2006 10:04:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14431 Dave, yeah I'd imagine no O'Reilly book deal for me. I suppose I won't be covering their conference this year as press either, but I wrote what I thought was the right thing to right and then reconsidered.<br /><br />I don't worry about being blackballed Artie, although that's contrary pretty much to the spirit of the blogosphere. The beautiful thing about blogging is that anyone can do it. There are no barriers to entry and so black balling isn't really a concern. At least for me. With your own blog you can reach people directly and don't need to depend on others or even an industry.<br /><br />Soul Patrol. Yes, I suppose it is ironic that I went ballistic when I'm involved with FM Publishing, and John Battelle is partners with Tim, but I think that this speaks about the freedom to blog at FM more than anything. I think the world of FM and think it's a pretty great network to be a part of. <br /><br />This said, I think John and everyone there are all about giving bloggers absolute freedom and editorial control. The fact that I can blog an article that they might not agree with speaks to this point and should be an encouragement to anyone who might consider blogging with them.<br /><br />My mea culpa with the "asshole" remark is mine and the right thing to do. It was wrong of me to call someone an asshole without knowing all the facts. It's a charged word and personal and for all I know O'Reilly himself had no idea that this letter was even being sent. I personalized the issue unfairly.<br /><br />I'm sure I'll have more to say on this after O'Reilly explains his side of things and more thoughtful comments. Dave, yeah I’d imagine no O’Reilly book deal for me. I suppose I won’t be covering their conference this year as press either, but I wrote what I thought was the right thing to right and then reconsidered.

I don’t worry about being blackballed Artie, although that’s contrary pretty much to the spirit of the blogosphere. The beautiful thing about blogging is that anyone can do it. There are no barriers to entry and so black balling isn’t really a concern. At least for me. With your own blog you can reach people directly and don’t need to depend on others or even an industry.

Soul Patrol. Yes, I suppose it is ironic that I went ballistic when I’m involved with FM Publishing, and John Battelle is partners with Tim, but I think that this speaks about the freedom to blog at FM more than anything. I think the world of FM and think it’s a pretty great network to be a part of.

This said, I think John and everyone there are all about giving bloggers absolute freedom and editorial control. The fact that I can blog an article that they might not agree with speaks to this point and should be an encouragement to anyone who might consider blogging with them.

My mea culpa with the “asshole” remark is mine and the right thing to do. It was wrong of me to call someone an asshole without knowing all the facts. It’s a charged word and personal and for all I know O’Reilly himself had no idea that this letter was even being sent. I personalized the issue unfairly.

I’m sure I’ll have more to say on this after O’Reilly explains his side of things and more thoughtful comments.

]]> By: Jeff Clavier http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14432 Jeff Clavier Mon, 29 May 2006 14:28:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14432 I agree with your mea culpa as the "asshole" bit was inappropriate, whereas I fully agree with your points. I agree with your mea culpa as the “asshole” bit was inappropriate, whereas I fully agree with your points.

]]> By: DigitalVisionaries http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14433 DigitalVisionaries Mon, 29 May 2006 12:29:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14433 Wireless World: A marketing malfunction?<br />The music industry's latest lawsuit -- this time against XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. over its new player -- is generating a lot of poor publicity. Still, experts tell UPI's Wireless World the recording business probably has a good argument in court because of an apparent marketing malfunction by the satellite-radio producers. <br /> Recent court decisions are giving the Washington-based Recording Industry Association of America a likely edge in this litigation. By Gene Koprowski<br /><br />http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi/20060526-084413-8923r.htm Wireless World: A marketing malfunction?
The music industry’s latest lawsuit — this time against XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. over its new player — is generating a lot of poor publicity. Still, experts tell UPI’s Wireless World the recording business probably has a good argument in court because of an apparent marketing malfunction by the satellite-radio producers.
Recent court decisions are giving the Washington-based Recording Industry Association of America a likely edge in this litigation. By Gene Koprowski

http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi/20060526-084413-8923r.htm

]]> By: Eirik http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14434 Eirik Sat, 27 May 2006 15:24:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14434 "I tend to overreact on things sometimes"<br /><br />Overreact... I don't know. Usually you have very strong and well researched points.<br /><br />Your way of expressing yourself is one of the many good reasons for reading Thomas Hawk's digital connection.<br /><br />Keep up the good work. Keep the intelligent exaggeration, irony and humor. “I tend to overreact on things sometimes”

Overreact… I don’t know. Usually you have very strong and well researched points.

Your way of expressing yourself is one of the many good reasons for reading Thomas Hawk’s digital connection.

Keep up the good work. Keep the intelligent exaggeration, irony and humor.

]]> By: Soul Patrol http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14435 Soul Patrol Sat, 27 May 2006 06:28:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14435 I do find it funny that you went so ballastic, cussing up a storm etc., yet you continue to use the FM ad platform in which O'reilly is one of the key investors. I do find it funny that you went so ballastic, cussing up a storm etc., yet you continue to use the FM ad platform in which O’reilly is one of the key investors.

]]> By: Anonymous http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14436 Anonymous Sat, 27 May 2006 04:18:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14436 The trademark isn't "Web 2.0 Conference". It's "Web 2.0". And the protected use is conferences. The issue is descriptiveness and genericness of the mark. See Boing Boing. The trademark isn’t “Web 2.0 Conference”. It’s “Web 2.0″. And the protected use is conferences. The issue is descriptiveness and genericness of the mark. See Boing Boing.

]]> By: Anonymous http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14437 Anonymous Sat, 27 May 2006 04:18:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14437 The trademark isn't "Web 2.0 Conference". It's "Web 2.0". And the protected use is conferences. The issue is descriptiveness and genericness of the mark. See Boing Boing. The trademark isn’t “Web 2.0 Conference”. It’s “Web 2.0″. And the protected use is conferences. The issue is descriptiveness and genericness of the mark. See Boing Boing.

]]> By: c http://thomashawk.com/2006/05/more-thoughts-on-todays-oreilly-media.html/comment-page-1#comment-14438 c Sat, 27 May 2006 02:31:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/thomashawk/?p=2030#comment-14438 Well, my feelings on ORA haven't changed, so here's <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/97956254@N00/154063693/" rel="nofollow">the original image</a>.<br /><br />Creative Commons FTW! Well, my feelings on ORA haven’t changed, so here’s the original image.

Creative Commons FTW!

]]>