Web 2.0? Bah, Humbug!
Don't know why everyone's so pissed at Tim O'Reilly for trying to trademark “Web 2.0″ for conferences: the guy's in the conference business, which is coming back to life again, so being about to own “Web 2.0″ is perhaps a good way to sell a few more tickets, although you have to wonder how much business he'll be getting after pissing off so many people. If you're that upset, move on. Forget about Web 2.0 because, after all, it's just so yesterday. We're talking Web 3.0 or Web 4.0 - or in the spirit of Spinal Tap - let's take it all the way to Web 11.0. It's like Web 2.0 is going to become the “Coca-Cola” of the Internet. For whatever reason, O'Reilly wants to own his “idea” that has already got him invaluable publicity and street cred. But if that's the way he wants to play, maybe he should take his ball and go home - and the rest of us will find another cool phrase to use (until some miscreant claims that one as well).
Addendum: For more insight into this P.R. debacle, check out Rob Hyndman, Mathew Ingram, Paul Kedrosky and Rick Segal, who does a nice job breaking down O'Reilly's rationale. By the way, here's Tom Raftery's post, which explains how a not-for-profit group, IT@Cork, received a cease and desist letter from O'Reilly's lawyers after using Web 2.0 for a half-day conference - a conference O'Reilly was invited to attend.
Update: The image (top left) is the O'Reilly meme map from his well-cited Web 2.0 manifesto that appeared in September 2003 and really put him on the map as one of the leading Web 2.0 thinkers. Betcha O'Reilly now wants all the goodwill back that he had when his thesis appeared. By the way, does anyone know if O'Reilly actually created “Web 2.0″? Maybe he was just the first person to run with it.
May 26th, 2006 at 8:16 am
I don't think that Tim O coined the term. He just popularized it. If it is true then Tim is very short sighted and needs to address it. I agree Web20World would be ok with me but not Web 2.0. Hell I have a podcast channel on iTunes titled Web 2.0. Will he try to sue me. In a court it will be found that Web 2.0 was used before he used it so the case doesn't look good. Plus the word is too generic to be service or trade marked. IMO
Anyway isn't O'Rielly Irish? Let the little guy alone
May 26th, 2006 at 8:33 am
Since it's clear that Web 2.0 is overfunded and under-monetized, and now trademarked, it's time to move on. Not only in terminology, but architecture. I propose 'Web 2.5', or “the always-on-you web”. Because networks only go so far…
May 26th, 2006 at 9:38 am
Oh they've already trademarked it:
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=kb7nir.2.1
May 26th, 2006 at 10:10 am
If only Tim O.'s dastardliness ended there, I have been similarly ceased and desisted in response to my efforts to change my name to James 2.0 - a tribute to my recent (if incomplete) commitment to maturity - you know just like the mini-vanning of the web - growing up, turning your back (with fond and hazy memories) on your hyperactive youth, making some money, getting in touch with the community, trusting a little more, buying a bed with a frame, etc. etc. Next up on Tim O.'s IP strategy - patenting vapour…or perhaps dark matter…or the circle….