[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: What Bill says




This whole debate turns on two issues:
1.   The need to respect an authors work, and
2.   The propogation of a brilliant set of ideas.

My thoughts on various comments are below:


>From: 1earth permaculture <permaculture1@start.com.au>
>Reply-To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
>To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
>Subject: Re: What Bill says
>Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:39:02 +1000
>
>From my reading of that spiel, the Manual is the curriculum of the
>Design Course, and that any other permaculture "curriculum must be by
>application to the author".
>>>has this been the practise in the past?

>
>Does that mean if we want to run a PDC course or even a short course
>on a particular aspect eg How To Build a Herb Spiral, we first must
>have it approved by Bill and his Institute?
>
>The two comments "nor can any group of people substantially alter or
>assert ownership of the text" and "people need to write their own
>curriculum and textbooks and not plagiarise my work" seem to be at
>odds.
>>>  I disagree, I think the two quotes are inclusive.


>My reading is that if we want to continue under the permaculture
>umbrella as designers and teachers we each have to create our own
>textbooks of curriculum, following the principles outlined in Bill's
>(and David's) books so as not to "substantially alter" the work, but
>not too closely as to be accused of plagiarism.  And then submit it to
>Bill for approval.
>>>   If you did design your own curriculum, why would you need to seek 
>>>approval for it?

>My greatest concern to Bill's trademarking "Permaculture Design
>Course" and "Permaculture" is that teachers and designers would have
>to pay royalties.
>>>  Perhaps this is the nub of many peoples concerns.   If a PDC teacher 
>>>has been copying Bill's work and distributing it to students, then surely 
>>>that would have breached copyright in the work.

Would it not be a better idea for a teacher to purchase the original PDC 
notes and books from Bill and sell it on with a markup?

>I suppose if these royalties went to an Institute that successfully
>administered the curriculum and PDC and higher degrees, then it would
>be a good investment. (?)  Such an Institute would, if it followed the
>principles laid down in the Manual, be democratic and open in its
>affairs.
>>>   An owner of a copyright does not need to be democratic.   In fact the 
>>>disposal of a property right is usually quite arbitrary and driven by 
>>>commercial reality, ie; the dreadful $$$$.   The fact that Permaculture 
>>>is a movement which can and does change peoples lives for the better does 
>>>not mean that the rights to the underlying intellectual property are 
>>>alientated from their rightful owner.   I note that there has been many 
>>>suggestions here that the underlying intellectual property originated 
>>>from others beside Bill Mollison.

>Permaculture is different things to different people.  This is one of
>the reasons why it is so successful and has spread so quickly. This is
>also why we are asked in our PDC to define the term.  It is also why
>the PDC courses needs to be administered a hell of a lot better than
>they are at present (to avoid the example of a one week PDC courses
>when it clearly says 72-hours duration, and the registration of cowboy
>PDC teachers and designers).
>>>   If teachers of the PDC agree that a common approach is required, then 
>>>it follows that somehow agreement needs to be reached on funding to allow 
>>>this to occur.   I would think that Royalties might well be the best 
>>>source of such funds.   Whilst also building on a quality product in the 
>>>PDC manuals from a single source.
>
>This whole situation also reminds me of the current state in the
>internet's growth, with companies like Yahoo initially giving it all
>away free until it grows to a critical mass, then start charging (for
>something that we all created together).  The internet is going
>through a massive attrition as companies fail and people adjust to the
>internet being capitalised and regulated.  History repeats, are there
>are a lot of similarities between the net and permaculture.
>
>>>   The internet is littered with business models that were not built on a 
>>>positive cash flow.   If you want something to endure, you'd better build 
>>>a solid base and negative cash flows certainly do not do that.

>Bill must be laughing now.  He reminds me of ol' Joh Bjelke Petersen
>coming out every so often to "feed the chooks" (Joh was an Australian
>politician suffering early dementia who was refering to himself giving
>press conferences - the media and public were his "chooks" or
>chickens).
>
>>>   I think it is bad form to draw such an analogy and I do not think 
>>>others appreciate such comments.

I do not know what Bill Mollison thinks of all the debate surrounding the 
whole issue of copyright, yet I would very much welcome his contribution on 
the subject as it might help others understand how to move forward in a more 
orderly manner.   It might also inject some respect into the debate.

>Marcus Webb
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au
>
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to permaculture as: robertscroft@hotmail.com
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
>leave-permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu
>Get the list FAQ at: 
>http://www.ibiblio.org/ecolandtech/documents/permaculture.faq


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp