Comments on: Web 2.0 TM 2.0 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/ any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced Thu, 12 Apr 2012 14:32:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Kim Cameron’s Identity Weblog » TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION DEPARTMENT http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3841 Kim Cameron’s Identity Weblog » TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION DEPARTMENT Wed, 31 May 2006 18:10:35 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3841 [...] UPDATE - Robert Hyndman has a fabulous post on the selfishness of trying to trade mark a term as generic as Web 2.0.   [...] [...] UPDATE – Robert Hyndman has a fabulous post on the selfishness of trying to trade mark a term as generic as Web 2.0.   [...]

]]> By: Advanced Technology Products Interactive » Blog Archive » And some of the replies to tim http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3815 Advanced Technology Products Interactive » Blog Archive » And some of the replies to tim Wed, 31 May 2006 08:57:21 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3815 [...] Wack-a-mole 2.0  but I tend to agree with Rob Hyndman that Web 2.0 is not something that is really trademarkable. As Marty Schwimmer of The Trademark Blog notes in a short post on the whole controversy, “If you coin and promulgate a term, you can sell it as a buzzword or you can sell it as a brand, but under trademark law, it’s virtually impossible to do both.” [...] [...] Wack-a-mole 2.0  but I tend to agree with Rob Hyndman that Web 2.0 is not something that is really trademarkable. As Marty Schwimmer of The Trademark Blog notes in a short post on the whole controversy, “If you coin and promulgate a term, you can sell it as a buzzword or you can sell it as a brand, but under trademark law, it’s virtually impossible to do both.” [...]

]]> By: Tim O’Reilly handles it well — almost » mathewingram.com/work http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3812 Tim O’Reilly handles it well — almost » mathewingram.com/work Wed, 31 May 2006 02:54:24 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3812 [...] One of my fellow organizers, Stuart MacDonald, firmly believes that O’Reilly was right to try and enforce its trademark (although it hasn’t been approved yet), but I tend to agree with Rob Hyndman that Web 2.0 is not something that is really trademarkable. As Marty Schwimmer of The Trademark Blog notes, “If you coin and promulgate a term, you can sell it as a buzzword or you can sell it as a brand, but under trademark law, it’s virtually impossible to do both.” [...] [...] One of my fellow organizers, Stuart MacDonald, firmly believes that O’Reilly was right to try and enforce its trademark (although it hasn’t been approved yet), but I tend to agree with Rob Hyndman that Web 2.0 is not something that is really trademarkable. As Marty Schwimmer of The Trademark Blog notes, “If you coin and promulgate a term, you can sell it as a buzzword or you can sell it as a brand, but under trademark law, it’s virtually impossible to do both.” [...]

]]> By: Technology in plain English » Has O’Reilly gone over to the Dark side? http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3787 Technology in plain English » Has O’Reilly gone over to the Dark side? Tue, 30 May 2006 13:08:28 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3787 [...] Marc, I can’t be fired because I don’t work for O’Reilly , I work for myself. And I also like the subversive ness at being able to put across the IT@Cork side of the story to O’Reilly readers who might otherwise be unaware of it. I let people make up their own minds - mine is that apart from any distress caused to Tom at a time when he has other priorities , I think that the O’Reilly actions are a ‘out-of-character’ mistake. It’s a mistake because O’Reilly has far more to lose from the loss of customer goodwill than gaining ownership of a particular tag. Update (2) Joe Drumgoole has a post about how O’Reilly can win back community support. (He’s also got a good explanation of what Web 2.0 is about). Update (3)  Rob Hyndman has an explanation of what it would take for somebody to ‘own’ the Web 2.0 Tag. [...] [...] Marc, I can’t be fired because I don’t work for O’Reilly , I work for myself. And I also like the subversive ness at being able to put across the IT@Cork side of the story to O’Reilly readers who might otherwise be unaware of it. I let people make up their own minds – mine is that apart from any distress caused to Tom at a time when he has other priorities , I think that the O’Reilly actions are a ‘out-of-character’ mistake. It’s a mistake because O’Reilly has far more to lose from the loss of customer goodwill than gaining ownership of a particular tag. Update (2) Joe Drumgoole has a post about how O’Reilly can win back community support. (He’s also got a good explanation of what Web 2.0 is about). Update (3)  Rob Hyndman has an explanation of what it would take for somebody to ‘own’ the Web 2.0 Tag. [...]

]]> By: David T.S. Fraser http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3746 David T.S. Fraser Sun, 28 May 2006 14:37:17 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3746 I can't help but think that a pending American service mark application probably doesn't travel well and shouldn't affect what someone does in Ireland. And I don't see a registered mark at the <a href="http://www.patentsoffice.ie/eRegister/default.asp">Irish Patents Office</a>. I can’t help but think that a pending American service mark application probably doesn’t travel well and shouldn’t affect what someone does in Ireland. And I don’t see a registered mark at the Irish Patents Office.

]]> By: Tim Marman http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3724 Tim Marman Sat, 27 May 2006 23:12:56 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3724 I said essentially the same thing yesterday as well. In my mind, there's no question that Web 2.0 has become generic. http://slashstar.com/blogs/tim/archive/2006/05/26/The_Web_2_0_Trademark_Debacle.aspx Oh, and Ralph, prior art doesn't apply to trademarks. Trademarks become enforceable when they are used in commerce, not when someone "invents" the term. I said essentially the same thing yesterday as well. In my mind, there’s no question that Web 2.0 has become generic.

http://slashstar.com/blogs/tim/archive/2006/05/26/The_Web_2_0_Trademark_Debacle.aspx

Oh, and Ralph, prior art doesn’t apply to trademarks. Trademarks become enforceable when they are used in commerce, not when someone “invents” the term.

]]> By: Branedy http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3720 Branedy Sat, 27 May 2006 19:08:21 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3720 This is one of those half jokes. As I too blog out of Cork I know Tom and the people trying to organize this conference. Their intent was not to usurp the trade mark, they were just trying to get people to talk about this. Only good could have come out of this for O’Reilly. The joke part is the reason sharks won't eat lawyers, professional courtesy. This is one of those half jokes. As I too blog out of Cork I know Tom and the people trying to organize this conference. Their intent was not to usurp the trade mark, they were just trying to get people to talk about this. Only good could have come out of this for O’Reilly. The joke part is the reason sharks won’t eat lawyers, professional courtesy.

]]> By: Cory Doctorow - O’Reilly apologist » at Tom Raftery’s I.T. views http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3716 Cory Doctorow - O’Reilly apologist » at Tom Raftery’s I.T. views Sat, 27 May 2006 15:29:03 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3716 [...] UPDATE - Robert Hyndman has a fabulous post on the selfishness of trying to trade mark a term as generic as Web 2.0. Technorati Tags: cory doctorow, it@cork, itcork, marc canter, Web 2.0, web20Bookmark at these sites:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...] [...] UPDATE – Robert Hyndman has a fabulous post on the selfishness of trying to trade mark a term as generic as Web 2.0. Technorati Tags: cory doctorow, it@cork, itcork, marc canter, Web 2.0, web20Bookmark at these sites:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]

]]> By: Stuart MacDonald http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3710 Stuart MacDonald Sat, 27 May 2006 13:30:04 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3710 <strong>The Web 2.0 bun fight...</strong> There's certainly enough been written on this, and by people far better informed than me (check out Rob's great post...... The Web 2.0 bun fight…

There’s certainly enough been written on this, and by people far better informed than me (check out Rob’s great post……

]]> By: Mark Evans http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/comment-page-1/#comment-3709 Mark Evans Sat, 27 May 2006 12:15:03 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/05/27/web-20-tm-20/#comment-3709 <strong>Early Morning Thoughts 'bout Web 2.0, Vonage, MySpace...</strong> After much thought and a lot of reading, I'm even more convinced Tim O'Reilly is dead wrong in his efforts to trademark "Web 2.0", and the people who are supporting him (particularly the Silicon Valley crowd) are nothing more than apologists who ca... Early Morning Thoughts ’bout Web 2.0, Vonage, MySpace…

After much thought and a lot of reading, I’m even more convinced Tim O’Reilly is dead wrong in his efforts to trademark “Web 2.0″, and the people who are supporting him (particularly the Silicon Valley crowd) are nothing more than apologists who ca…

]]>