[Dialogue] new E.D. for ICA

[Thomas Morrison]

Hi everybody,

Just curious . . . I remember participating in some of the workshops that created parts of the methodologies present in LENS, etc.
How can someone copyright materials that volunteers created in what they thought--and I still think--was God's work on B1/2 of the whole world (or words to that effect)?
The law (as opposed to the Law-grin) is not one of my strong points.

Tom


----- Original Message ----- 
From: W. J. 
To: Colleague Dialogue
Sent: 9/30/2007 12:19:33 PM 
Subject: Re: [Dialogue] new E.D. for ICA


Don, can you imagine trying to copyright and "control" RS-1? Or control the creativity and engagement that it created?

The "complex intellectual property" issues they are referencing are the copyrighted material that took the form of the ToP training. Before that development, the same ideas were embodied in other labels: LENS, NINS, Town Meeting, Human Development Consults.

My best guess is that ICA-USA is trying to make a buck, certainly by "selling" copies of the ToP manual, but more broadly by exerting some control and direction over this "child" -- the ToP Facilitators -- and constricting its evolution by legal enforcement of the copyright, as well as by taking an authoritarian stance toward the group's issues.

Just a clue, since I'm just a subversive bystander, not an insider.

Can you imagine what Joe Mathews would have said about this development? Exactly thirty years ago, we lost him suddenly and prematurely. But I can still hear that voice booming from beyond the grave. And I know he is quoting Kang Byong Hoon, whose peculiarly accented words were: "BOO SHEE!" (that's Korean for B.S.).

Does anyone honestly believe that if the organization were vibrantly alive, growing, and oriented to the future, not to mention to authentic service in the world beyond its fortress in Uptown, their board would be so focused on this one issue?

Meanwhile, the Archives--and especially the most vulnerable elements: film, video, and audio archives--are deteriorating in uncontrolled conditions in the basement, without professional intervention. The entire common memory of the organization has been wiped out, "evicted". We've had regime change. And the new regime doesn't have a clue about what's down there, let alone what it means.

So I guess now it's time to have a Living Legacy event.

Marshall



Don Hinkelman <hinkel at sgu.ac.jp> wrote:
The phrase in that announcement that caught my eye was about ICA-USA's "complex intellectual property".   I wonder what that means? 


As one who is heavily involved in proliferating open-source educational software and content, I am finding the following values useful:
- trademarks, icons and symbols are important to protect
- specific books, papers, forms are copyright to the authors (permission needed to reprint) 
- processes, ideas, and methodologies are public property and should be aggressively shared 


I am curious how others view "property".


Don Hinkelman


Maybe I'm the last to know, but looks like ICA-USA has a new permanent ED selected:

http://www.ica-usa.org/announcement.htm

His last job was as Finance and Operations Director of Chicago's Gay Games in 2006.

Marshall Jones

_______________________________________________
Dialogue mailing list
Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20070930/d0972631/attachment-0001.html