[Dialogue] Archives Work and Open Source
M. George Walters
m.george.walters at verizon.net
Wed May 19 10:02:44 CDT 2010
Publishing uses copyright but can make it very liberal - i.e. don't both me
unless you are trying to reprint the entire book or article.
I think most of us want to focus our lives on getting the word out, not
hiding and protecting it.
With kindest regards.
M. George Walters
Resurgence Publishing Corporation
4240 Sandy Shores Dr
Lutz, FL 33558
USA
Tel: +1 (813) 948-7267
Fax: +1 (813) 333-1787
Mob: +1 (813) 505-9041
URL: www.ResurgencePublishing.com
Professional Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mgwalters
From: dialogue-bounces at wedgeblade.net
[mailto:dialogue-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf Of Wayne Nelson
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 10:15
To: Colleague Dialogue
Subject: Re: [Dialogue] Archives Work and Open Source
The operating protocol, developed at the 1996 ICA meetings in Cairo says
that anything created prior to 1988 is the intellectual "property" of all
ICA organizations and anything created after that is the "property" of the
ICA that created it.
There is a group in North America that has been mandated to work on this
very concern. It arose out of a meeting in Chicago about a year ago - maybe
a little more. The major suggestion under consideration is, I believe, some
form of "Creative Commons" copyright / licensing. I haven't heard anything
from that group, but the conversation has been launched. That group has sort
of gone quiet, but the team has been created.
"Open source" is a movement that is gaining ground in several fields. It
began with the software development field and has spread. It's an
intriguing concept and forces us to examine the paradigm of proprietary
material. The idea of "Creative Commons" has gained some traction. Very
briefly, there are several forms of licensing under this scheme. This
summary comes from
http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/
Attribution
This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work,
even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation.
This is the most accommodating of licenses offered, in terms of what others
can do with your works licensed under Attribution.
Attribution Share Alike
This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work even for
commercial reasons, as long as they credit you and license their new
creations under the identical terms. This license is often compared to open
source software licenses. All new works based on yours will carry the same
license, so any derivatives will also allow commercial use.
Attribution No Derivatives
This license allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as
long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to you.
Attribution Non-Commercial
This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work
non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and
be non-commercial, they don't have to license their derivative works on the
same terms.
Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike
This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work
non-commercially, as long as they credit you and license their new creations
under the identical terms. Others can download and redistribute your work
just like the by-nc-nd license, but they can also translate, make remixes,
and produce new stories based on your work. All new work based on yours will
carry the same license, so any derivatives will also be non-commercial in
nature.
Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives
This license is the most restrictive of our six main licenses, allowing
redistribution. This license is often called the "free advertising" license
because it allows others to download your works and share them with others
as long as they mention you and link back to you, but they can't change them
in any way or use them commercially.
As I see it, the toughest issue to tackle is our current training manuals.
In Canada, our operating policy is to attribute anything that is
substantially someone else's work. We have several examples that fall along
a spectrum. For example, we use some work done by John and Ann Epps and
published in their newsletter. We added a category to it and it always
carries printed attribution of the original source. We also use a paper John
wrote - no changes - and it carries his name. I created something based on
the work of another person and we attribute the original source, because the
similarity is very obvious.
We share pretty freely with other ICA's, because they use these materials as
references to create their own materials. We've offered 3 of our
foundational course manuals along with the trainers manual to any ICA who
asks and several have taken us up on the offer. If people ask, we respond.
When something is used with no change or very little change, we ask for
attribution and we ask that that attribution be noted on the piece itself.
If our materials are used as a reference only, we say ,"God bless you, do
your best to create the best stuff you can for your situation.
In relation to the public, our licensing / copyright needs to be a bit
tighter- if that's the right word. In the worst case scenario, there are
people out there who will cross the boundaries simply because they think
this is good stuff and they want to use it themselves. There are many people
who take our courses and go back to their organizations and share what they
have learned with their colleagues. We know and encourage that. There are
others who use it as a part of their own fee for service training work with
out attribution or payment of royalties. We believe that is unethical and we
need to be able to protect this work. If ToP methodology is to be taught,
we believe it needs to be done with superior quality. We have a pretty
solid process for preparing people to teach our courses. We work with them
and take them through a journey through which they are accredited to teach
our courses.
Our situation is a little unique in that we have to ICA Organizations.
Anything we create - manuals, books and articles etc are copyrighted by the
Canadian Institute of Cultural Affairs - ICA Canada. ICA Associates Inc.
pays ICA Canada royalties for the use of these materials and for the sale of
books. These royalties provide ICA Canada with core funding for their work.
Currently, we have established an annual minimum amount of royalties to be
paid. If revenues go over that minimum, ICA Associates pays more than the
minimum. It's a structural solution that has worked since 1999.
Our ToP Facilitator Certification Program was born out of a similar set of
concerns. We want people operating in our name and using
ToP methodology to be the very best. We actually found people calling
themselves Certified ToP facilitators before we even had a certification
process in place. We publish the list of Certified ToP Facilitators and
accredited trainers on our website; so it is clear to the public who is who.
These are fair concerns. I believe we need to address them. I believe we
need to educate ourselves in order to take the conversation to an
appropriate resolution.
\\/
"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 <mailto:joyful52 at gmail.com>
To: Colleague Dialogue <mailto:dialogue at wedgeblade.net>
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 material so 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
< > < > < > < > < >
Wayne Nelson - ICA Associates Inc
ICA - 416-691-2316 - - - Cell - 647-229-6910
http://ica-associates.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100519/b87ec6ab/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Dialogue
mailing list