Tim O'Reilly Sends a Cease and Desist to a Non Profit Over the Use of the Term "Web 2.0," What a Load of Crap
Original photo by x180 borrowed and derived under the beautiful Creative Commons attribution free to make derivative works license. Thank you James and hah! Good luck suing me now Tim!
Update: Please see this post for an apology from me as well as my current thinking on this situation.
Update: I probably shouldn't have called Tim O'Reilly an asshole and have given this matter more thought and have blogged my thoughts here.
This is unbelievable to me. Some guy named brady over at O'Reilly Media is out this morning actually trying to justify sending a cease and desist letter to someone else for using the term Web 2.0. Well not actually Brady, per se, but he throws some person named Sara Winge under the bus apparently at King Tim O'Reilly's request. What kind of crazy world are we living in?
I suppose Mike Arrington's probably next on the hit list (Web 2.0 Seattle party? What were you thinking buddy? Doh!) and it looks like I'll need to go scrub my blog to change all the references from Web 2.0 to Web 2.1. In fact, right now I hereby claim all rights to not only Web 2.1 but Web 2.2, Web 2.3, Web 2.4, Web 2.5, Web 3.0, Web 4.0, Web 5.0, and well when I get around to it I'll do some more claiming. Oh and "Hot Donkey" that one too, that one belongs to me. Don't you dare try to put on the "Hot Donkey" Conference or I will come after your ass big time. And any derivation of "Hot Donkey" also is mine. "Hot Ass" "Warm Donkey" don't even think about them, they're all mine.
Oh by the way, it's not Tim himself who's defending this act of stupidity this morning in the blogosphere it's some guy named Brady. According to Brady's post, Tim's "off the grid" and on "vacation." And before you try and get too smart I wouldn't be using the terms "off the grid" or even "vacation" anymore either unless you want Brady and Tim to sue your ass.
So until Tim O'Reilly apologizes for this asinine move I'm going to start using the term Web 2.1 whenever I mean Web 2.0. It will be a (wink, wink) code word just between you and me to mean some kind of web services thing that’s all ajaxy like. And not that Thomas Hawk would ever be asked to speak at an O'Reilly conference but it might be kind of nice if when asked in the future the Web 2.1 big wigs declined O'Reilly's request with a reason like, "uh, you know Tim, I'd, uh, really like to participate and all, but, uh, well, uh, I'm afraid you might try to sue me for using my own name after the fact, sorry buddy."
Hey, nice asshole move by the way O'Reilly going after a non-profit. IT@Cork, my advice to you is to just ignore this piece of stupidity and when O'Reilly's lawyers finally call just answer back into the phone, "what! I can't hear you, talk louder!" Keep saying this over and over again until they hang up.
You can check out this amazing piece of legal literature on Flickr here.
Tags:
posted by Thomas Hawk at 8:27 AM
16 Comments:
So Web 2.1 would be a Web 2.0 where Creative Commons licenses actually exist, then?
As opposed, of course, to Web 2.0, which is clearly All Rights Reserved.
I heard Al Gore invented the Internet.
I want Web 11.0
So you think that a company - non-profit or otherwise - trading on the good reputation established by another company in the same field by naming their product identically is acceptable?
Because that's what this case is about. Ignore the hippy-dippy bullshit that surrounds this whole Web 2.0 stuff, and that's all you get.
O'Reilly/CMP have long organised the Web 2.0 Conference. Someone else decided to make a conference and call it "Web 2.0 Half Day Conference". That's exactly the same as me deciding to organise a "Macworld Half Day Conference" and being surprised when IDG came after my ass.
Ian, you don't wait two weeks before a non profit is putting on a conference to threaten to sue them when you knew about it much earlier. If O'Reilly objected then he should have been vocal about it much earlier. Even at worst he should have said we'll let this one go, but the next guy that tries this... I seriously doubt O'Reilly would have been damaged to any significant degree to have let this conference go on.
Secondly, if Tim O'Reilly was going to assert ownership over the term Web 2.0, he should have done it a long time ago. Instead he waited until a whole host of people adopted it, embraced it, celebrated it and added to the public lexicon, before asserting his right to possess it.
It would be like if four years into the Vietnam war protests someone said, oh, you know what? Back four years ago I licensed the peace sign so guess what, you all can't use it anymore.
It's too late at this point. Web 2.0 has become something much larger and much more culturally significant than O'Reilly's conference. He lost his ability to control this term when he allowed it to run free as long as it did in the wild.
To assert ownership now is disingenious and contrary to the spirit of what we all should be about.
Thomas, no one is trying "assert ownership over" the phrase "Web 2.0". You can call a web site a Web 2.0 site. I could launch a magazine called "Web 2.0". Someone could print "Web 2.0 sucks ass" on a bunch of t shirts - and none of this would infringe on any service mark of O'Reilly/CMP's.
What you can't do, and I can't do, and IT@Cork should have known it couldn't do, is create a conference called "Web 2.0 Conference".
It's nothing to do with controlling the term, and everything to do with protecting the reputation of a conference than O'Reilly and CMP have worked hard to establish.
Ian, it's ridiculous to try and assert ownership over the phrase Web 2.0 Conference two weeks before the conference. They knew about this much earlier and to wait until the last minute is super bad form.
Whether associated with a conference or not, Web 2.0 has become something much greater than a conference and to now try to restrict it's use in any capacity falls under the too little too late category. O'Reilly should have been more vocal about their intention to own the term "Web 2.0" with regards to conferences back in 2003.
Part of the reason why Web 2.0 exploded as it did is because it was popularized by a whole host of people in a spirit of openness. Had O'Reilly made known his plans to try and contain the phrase Web 2.0 Conference back in 2003 I suspect that many people would not have embraced the term as we have.
I know I wouldn't have.
This popularization has benefited O'Reilly tremendously. It has been this super positive feeling associated with Web 2.0 and fueled by a whole host of people in the tech community that allowed it to grow like it had.
This is no different then Forgent trying to assert patent rights on the .jpg after sitting silent for years and allowing the .jpg to become the standard for digital photos. Now all of a sudden they seem to feel that they are losing massive amounts of money because of infringement. It's nothing more then a legal way to try and extort money. Web 2.0 is not a brand, it's a cultural movement. Whether it applies to T-Shirts or Conferences, O'Reilly shouldn't have the right to trademark this term anymore then Tom has the right to try and trademark the term blogosphere.
http://battellemedia.com/archives/002596.php
Too late, Blogosphere belongs to me! As does Usenet, pr0n, and AJAX. Oh wait, I think Colgate-Palmolive registered it first. Just like Hormel swiped Spam from Al Gore's Internet. By the way, there is a publishing company using my name - I wonder if I can sue them since I was using Zatz first. ;)
Thomas,
Inspired by your post on Web 2.0, I did a quick Factiva search and discovered that, although O'Reilly Media may have been the first to register a service mark for "Web 2.0", it was by no means the first to "coin" the term, as Sarah Winge is claiming.
In the July 1999 issue of Print magazine, Darcy DiNucci wrote a piece titled "Fragmented Future" about Web 2.0 vs. Web 1.0. I managed to track down a copy on the Web that you can find here:
http://www.allbusiness.com/periodicals/article/383501-1.html
Reading it, you can't help but see some similarities between her vision for Web 2.0 and the way the term is used today.
A year earlier, in the summer of 1998, a company called Conversa released a new version of their Conversa Web software - a voice-powered browser - and called it "Web 2.0". The software is no longer for sale, but Conversa may still hold the trademark on it.
O'Reilly Media is free to make asses of themselves by suing a free conference using the term "Web 2.0." I suppose they are also free to claim they coined the term too. But they're only making asses out of themselves again.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
I'm still trying to figure out just exactly what Web 2.0 means! Does anyone know??
lotro gold
lord of the rings gold
lord of the rings online gold
lotro gold
lord of the rings gold
lord of the rings online gold
Warhammer gold
Warhammer online gold
Warhammer money
War gold
War money
Tabula Rasa Credit
lotro gold
lord of the rings gold
lord of the rings online gold
lord of the rings online gold
lord of the rings gold
Tabula Rasa Credit
World of Warcraft gold
PotBS Doubloon
Pirates of the Burning Sea Doubloon
PotBS Gold
Pirates of the Burning Sea Gold
lotro gold
lord of the rings gold
lord of the rings online gold
Tabula Rasa Credit
Warhammer gold
Warhammer online gold
PotBS Doubloon
PotBS gold
Age of Conan gold
Age of Conan gold
Pirates of the Burning Sea gold
Pirates of the Burning Sea Doubloon
心中一阵不安升降机，因为我忽然又想起了那道剑光升降平台，可怕的剑光升降台，美丽的剑光登车桥。为什么那一剑是那么的美丽货架，却又那么的可怕呢集装袋？在我倒下之前我说地磅，好美的剑塑料托盘，好恨的剑塑料托盘。我倒下了仓储笼。在我失去知觉之前仓储笼，我听到他说北京货架，这叫艺术超市货架，剑的艺术北京货架。
我并没有死广州货架，原来我的心是在右边仓储货架，而是不是左边货架厂。所以在那穿胸一剑之下我并没有死南京货架。
是一阵暴雨把我冲醒了货架公司。听说雨是上天的眼泪深圳货架，也许这天又有人死在那美丽的剑光之下吧服装货架！我张开嘴巴托盘，任雨水打进我的嘴托盘，直冲我的胃塑料托盘。我的伤口又开始流血塑料托盘，但已经不痛了木托盘。试问：仓储笼一个心已经死了的人仓储笼，肉体上的疼痛又算得了什么呢仓储笼？我知道我的刀再练一百年也无法那么美丽仓储笼，那么恨托盘，而且永远别想杀了他托盘。
我退出江湖了手推车，我没有通知江湖上的朋友们静音手推车，并来一个什么金盆洗手静音手推车，因为我的朋友们差不多都被他杀了置物架。我悄悄的走了置物架，隐进了山林之中堆垛架。俨然一个世外高人的样子堆垛架，每天一壶绿茶登高车，放在身边的几上登高车，然后或盯着一朵白云超市手推车，或盯着一片树叶物流手推车，或双目紧闭物流台车。我的刀在玉盆中泡了七七四十九天角钢货架，已经没有血腥味了角钢货架。然后我把它放在我的屋顶轻型货架，任它风吹雨打轻型货架。
十年就这年过去了中型货架。为何今天天忽然想起那柄剑中型货架，那道剑光重型货架？而且内心为什么如此不安重型货架？不应该是这样的仓库货架，对于一个喝了十年绿茶的人来说服装货架，面对死上海货架，也已不再惧怕精品货架，不再不安苏州货架，但今天又为何如此呢托盘货架？
莫非是他青岛货架，和他的剑库房货架，加上他的剑光沈阳货架。我已不问江湖之事天津货架，想他十年前也应该坐上武林盟主的位子了杭州货架，一个武林中人做了武林盟主山东货架，这一生还有什么要求的呢文件柜？
我不停的喝着绿茶工具柜。绿茶静心工具柜。但此时怎么也静不下来零件柜。茶已尽工作台。平时茶尽之时工作台，正也是日落之时工作桌。
一定快有什么事情发生了工作桌。
剑还是那美丽的剑Google左侧排名，如果再加上一道剑光吹塑机，就会形成剑的艺术色带，武学的艺术电源插座。
我问反光背心：为何还来找我滚针轴承，我已在十年之前就退出江湖了夜光粉。
他说文化石：因为你没死缎带，因为我没有对手风火轮。
我说激光打标机：十年前已不是你的对手平衡机，何况现在十年未动刀大功率led。
他说磁力泵：放眼天下梯子，只有你一个人是我的对手网眼袋，也只你一个人对我的威胁无尘布。
我不再说话手摇手电筒，因为我不知道说什么手板，我知道我十年前就开始找我毛巾布，发现我没有死就开始找我磁钢。我不死促销台，他心不安模具钢材。
他说时尚配饰：拿出你的刀筛网。
我说齿轮泵：我已无刀天使花房，命托辊，亦可有可无色丁。
他盯着我广告衫，握剑的手越来越紧钢坯，我知道那道美丽的剑光可能随时发出过滤网。在那美丽过后疏水阀，我的生命将画上句号胸章。
阳光照在了刀上发热管，反射到他的脸上手机耳机。他发现了那把刀螺杆，我的刀插销，宝刀蝴蝶，没有鞘的刀工具包。
刀已在我手中点钞机，刀还是那把刀配电箱，人却已不是那个人流苏，因为心不是那颗心沙滩巾。
他为了杀我竟找了我十年氯化镁，而为了和我比武竟帮我从屋顶拿下我的刀来双面胶带，并放在我的手中碳纤维。我忽然发现排线，他也变了汽车座垫，他在后悔十年前将所有高手都杀绝珍珠奶茶。
高手的悲哀太阳伞。
我握紧了刀桥架，我看着他的眼tpr，已经不再像十年前那样明亮了钢丝。
他的剑划出柴油发电机组，划出一道美丽的剑光护栏。我想围栏，这十年他大概在不停地使自己的剑光更美围栏。
我的刀也出了隔离网。简单的动作隔离网，一刀刺进了他的胸网片。那道美丽的光忽然停止网片，停在我的衣服上南京货架。
他说北京货架：这也是艺术北京货架，杀人的艺术北京货架，想不到你十年不动刀还懂这个艺术仓储货架。
我说仓储货架：因为我不想再让你痛苦了广州货架。
他说广州货架：谢谢货架厂。
我走了货架公司。我头也不回的走了塑料托盘。没有取回我的刀塑料托盘，因为我觉得它在我身边已经没用塑料托盘，我后悔我十年前为什么不扔了它塑料托盘？我听到了尸体倒下的声音塑料托盘。我流泪了塑料托盘，我真的不想杀他仓储笼，十年前不想仓储笼，十年后也不想仓储笼，因为我下山时答应过师父仓储笼，一切让着他仓储笼。
我叹了一口气仓储笼。远去仓储笼。
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home