[Dialogue] Archives Work and Open Source

[Lee Early]

FYI - - LENS International, Inc. had an attorney on its Board of Advise and Review who looked into the possibility of protecting the so called ToP methods.  Since they are based on "life methods" he did not feel as though anyone could copyright, trademark, or claim any exclusive title or right to use them.  That's the legal side.  The human side was that all our methods were to be given away.   That prospect scares folks to forgot that the methods are useless without the sprit or life understanding and stance that lies under them.

.05¢ please,

Lee



On May 19, 2010, at 5:50 AM, Bill Parker wrote:

> The issue Evelyn has raised is very important for all of us. Since our methods have always been open access, until TOP, there is no reason for us to desire anything else but open access. TOP needed to do what it did in order to create a business model that had market credibility. But, while we know there are unlimited gems in our archives, we are not about creating a business or any proprietary product. I find it more helpful to think about the archives and all the gems buried there from a historical view of a group of people in the 20th century who did all of this in order to respond faithfully to the times in which they lived. The notion of resurrecting any of it programmatically misses the value of what that body of work is. The question then, as it is today, is "How do we respond faithfully to the times in which we live?" It is not the past that has value but the future..And the future is open. Any serious consideration of making any part of our past proprietary is out of place for our future.   I share Evelyn's concern.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Evelyn Kurihara Philbrook
> To: Colleague Dialogue
> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 3:25 AM
> Subject: [Dialogue] Archives Work and Open Source
> 
> Dear Colleagues, 
> 
> I was very happy to work voluntarily to prepare the archives of the Town Meetings from the EI/ICA basement the first week of May with my many colleagues from the past and new ones from the present. I realize now that these documents do represent a baseline of data that research would find very helpful from our past work in making gold all the counties in many states and in many countries we conducted Town Meetings, though we only focused on the USA counties. The work began to reveal the huge amount of time it would take to finish the whole task. We just scratched the surface and it was exciting and overwhelming to realize how much has been done and how much more needs to be done. However, at some level I assumed that all this information of the movement which we are all working on together voluntarily, would become open source materialso that those who helped create the materials and worked jointly on these many projects could use them in the future to build ICA movements in the future around the world. 
> 
> However, I am not so sure this is a true statement. I do want to acknowledge the new current work of colleagues that bring new forms into being of old models we used in the past. I am clear that in each unique situation, adjustments must be made to adapt to customize a specific method to meet the needs of each client and each culture and that work is the brain power of the individuals who work on the model to bring it into being. However, the spirit belongs to us all. The original models created in the Academy, RS-I and on Imaginal Education, or in Town Meetings or any other methods, Social Process Triangles, etc... are we saying now that any model adapted individually are now owned by ICA USA or ICA Canada?
> 
> If any of us shares its models freely with other organizations with the proviso that they receive acknowledgment so that the methods may be used by anyone and not copyrighted to prevent others from using them, that seems on target. However to have methods copyrighted to prevent others from using a method which is based on a common understanding of our whole body, like RS I, CS I, or any of our other courses, does not make sense to me either. I understand if a method is being used without acknowledgment or without permission to make a profit is not correct, but to prevent anyone else from using a method at all who cannot pay for it, but is need of that method does not seem right either. We need to work this through so there is no misunderstanding. 
> 
> Anyone who has been working to transpose RS I into a secular course and would like to continue to share their work with people in Asia, please feel free to contact me. 
> 
> I am currently in USA right now and on skype: joyfuleakp  or Evelyn Philbrook.  My landline for the next two weeks is 559-875-4007 and ask for Evelyn.
> 
> Those who come to work on the archives, how is this material to be made available to colleagues that helped create it, or will we have to pay to have access to the materials once they are digitized? Will this mean only those who can afford to access them will have the right to read and use the material, or only students at a specific university, what does it mean? Is this what will happen to Joe's work because it is technically owned by the family?
> 
> I had hoped we can grow and share together for the future of the planet and those who care.
>  
> Evelyn Kurihara Philbrook
> ICA Certified Facilitator
> ICA International Director, VP of Asia and the Pacific
> ICA Taiwan Office:
> 3 fl.,#12, Lane 5, Tien Mou W. Rd, 
> Taipei, 11156, Taiwan ROC
> Tel: (886) 2-2871-3150
> Email: joyful52 at gmail.com, joyful at icatw.com
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dialogue mailing list
> Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
> _______________________________________________
> Dialogue mailing list
> Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net