http://www.markevanstech.com/2006/05/26/web-20-bah-humbug/ A Canadian Take on the Web Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:21:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 http://www.markevanstech.com/2006/05/26/web-20-bah-humbug/#comment-1486 goleafsgo Fri, 26 May 2006 14:10:28 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=1535#comment-1486 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.... 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….

]]> http://www.markevanstech.com/2006/05/26/web-20-bah-humbug/#comment-1485 Larry Borsato Fri, 26 May 2006 13:38:07 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=1535#comment-1485 Oh they've already trademarked it: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=kb7nir.2.1 Oh they've already trademarked it:
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=kb7nir.2.1

]]> http://www.markevanstech.com/2006/05/26/web-20-bah-humbug/#comment-1484 Anonymous Fri, 26 May 2006 12:33:30 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=1535#comment-1484 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... 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…

]]> http://www.markevanstech.com/2006/05/26/web-20-bah-humbug/#comment-1483 Anonymous Fri, 26 May 2006 12:16:37 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=1535#comment-1483 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 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

]]>