[Dialogue] Archives Work and Open Source

Wed May 19 12:34:30 CDT 2010

Thank you Wayne.

Evelyn

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Wayne Nelson <wnelson at ica-associates.ca>wrote:

>
> 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<joyful52 at gmail.com>>
>
>
> *To:* Colleague Dialogue <mailto:dialogue at wedgeblade.net<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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dialogue mailing list
> Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
>
>

-- 
Evelyn Kurihara Philbrook
ICA Certified Facilitator
ICA International Director
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100519/6dfb38a7/attachment-0001.html>