Web x, where x != 2.0
Regarding the O’Reilly/CMP “Web 2.0 (SM)” trademark shitstorm, Sean McGrath humourously suggested a workaround — using a different revision number instead of “2.0″, specifically e, 2.71….
However, it’s not quite that simple in many jurisdictions, apparently. It seems that trademark law — in the US, at least — allows trademarks which include a number to also cover uses within roughly plus or minus 10 of that number. In other words, CMP’s application will cover the range from Web -8.0 (SM) (assuming negative numbers are included?) to Web 12.0 (SM).
So much for “Web 3.0″, “Web 2.1″, “Web 2.71…”, and so on. Back to the drawing board, Sean! ;)
(disclaimer: IANAL, of course. Credit to Craig for that tidbit.)
Update: doh, got the value of e wrong…
It’s a great book — full of behind-the-scenes
details on how the spammers operate, how they get away with it on the
sending end, how they try to evade filters on the receiving end, and how
they’re fundamentally running the usual simple scams that have been around
since before email spam came into existence. Well worth reading.
