Comments on: Web Sue.0 – O’Reilly’s rep protectors wreck his rep

By: Keith

Keith — Sat, 27 May 2006 08:32:38 +0000

Yeah, I noticed that when I read O’Reilly Radar yesterday, thought I must say that wasn’t a definite conclusion I could pull from the wording of the letter. Hmmm… comment, if possible, retracted.

But what would be interesting is what Tim himself has to say on the matter, which we’ll have to wait a while to discover.

By: Larkin

Larkin — Fri, 26 May 2006 12:10:57 +0000

What got under my skin about the letter is the insinuation that IT@Cork was trying to profit from the use of Web 2.0.

Fact is IT@Cork is not for profit and has no other aim than bringing the Cork IT community together. Saying otherwise undermines the integrity of the people on the IT@Cork committe, many of whom I know well (from my time in business and as a member) and they are all fine people.

I hope it backfires on O’Reilly. I just signed up for their Safari online books account. It will make me think twice about renewing that subscription.

By: Donagh Kiernan

Donagh Kiernan — Fri, 26 May 2006 08:58:55 +0000

O’Reilly approved the letter (fact)

By: Damien

Damien — Fri, 26 May 2006 07:18:49 +0000

I’ve read the C&D letter a few times. They mention O’reilly four times in it and open the letter that they are working with O’Reilly. They are using his name to add more weight to their C&D and if anything they are the ones brining O’Reilly into this. They mention their partnership with O’Reilly twice in this letter. People will genuinely assume that the letter represents both parties. They could have stated that this has nothing to do with O’Reilly but they chose not to.

By: Keith

Keith — Fri, 26 May 2006 01:42:51 +0000

In fairness, this is nothing to do with O’Reilly: CMP are the bad guys here.

By: Tom Raftery

Tom Raftery — Thu, 25 May 2006 21:04:17 +0000

I’ll take 4 (will they make them in xtra small for little Enrique?)