[Oe List ...] IP rights to Social Process Triangles
Herman Greene
hfgreene at mindspring.com
Thu Feb 25 15:13:20 CST 2010
All very helpful. I'm a lawyer and I work mostly with technology-based
startup companies. I know some about copyright but its not my field.
I think all of us associated with EI should be free to use the corporate
wisdom. I like what Marilyn wrote. Of course, it would be absurd for someone
outside our group to claim an exclusive copyright. We would have many
witnesses as to where the original work came from.
It does belong to all.
There are some interesting types of open source copyrighting alternatives
now like a "creative commons" license. See
http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/. These licenses from the original
author either:
Licenses
The following describes each of the six main licenses offered when you
choose to publish your work <http://creativecommons.org/choose> with a
Creative Commons license. We have listed them starting with the most
accommodating license type you can choose and ending with the most
restrictive license type you can choose.
License Conditions
Creators choose a set of conditions they wish to apply to their work.
Attribution
Attribution
by
You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your copyrighted work
- and derivative works based upon it - but only if they give credit the way
you request.
Share Alike
Share Alike
sa
You allow others to distribute derivative works only under a license
identical to the license that governs your work.
Noncommercial
Non-Commercial
nc
You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your work - and
derivative works based upon it - but for non-commercial purposes only.
No Derivative Works
No Derivative Works
nd
You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform only verbatim copies
of your work, not derivative works based upon it.
At any rate it sounds like I can use the triangles in my work. I'm assuming
the Jenkins have no objection to this.
Herman
_____
From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf
Of R Williams
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 7:36 AM
To: Order Ecumenical Community
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] IP rights to Social Process Triangles
Marilyn,
These are excellent points and add much clarity to our dialogue.
Thanks,
Randy
--- On Wed, 2/24/10, marilyncrocker <marilyncrocker at juno.com> wrote:
From: marilyncrocker <marilyncrocker at juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] IP rights to Social Process Triangles
To: oe at wedgeblade.net
Date: Wednesday, February 24, 2010, 8:57 PM
Hi Marshall, Charles, Randy, Terry, et al,
I just wanted to weigh in on this provocative discussion. Yes, the
academic, publishing, intellectual properties contexts have indeed shifted
in the 20 plus years since the 1988 "Diaspora."
I was always of the understanding of Charles and Jeanette, that all our
constructs were created and offered to all.
However, when I began to work with folks in academe, specifically the
National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDE), and
suggested the "triangles" as the conceptual framework for Education
Accountability -- and then we did the work of thinking through the dynamics
of "creates, limits, sustains" for each relationship -- my clients wanted to
publish their version of the triangles, and requested the origin of the
conceptual model, which I offered as the Ecumenical Institute.
This original work led to three Wingspread Conferences, all based on the
"triangle" as our conceptual framework, but taken down to lower levels re:
implementation of free and appropriate education for all students with
disabilities and their families. Again, reference was given in published
documents to the EI for the conceptual framework.
As a consultant who brought with me, like skin, "all our screens" in doing
my work, I would have been less concerned about documenting references, but
the rest of the world works differently. I needed to learn that it was
important to document "what I said worked, and how, and why. and according
to whom!" Our OE mode of research was different, more organic, deeply
experiential, less dependent upon measurable data, more informed by rich,
qualitative input, triangulated multiple times, across a myriad of cultures.
I am comfortable walking the razor's edge -- if there is actually one:
bowing to those who require footnotes and bibliographical entries re: all
our vast corporate OE/ICA/EI wisdom ; or, just sharing wisdom, life
experience, lessons learned, shaped around concepts like the Bug, the
Pentagon, the 144s, the SP triangles, etc.
I'm guessing, that if someone decided to claim our work as their own, and
prevent any of us or others from ever using it again, we might rise up as a
mighty force and do as the common folks of 36 counties in Massachusetts did
in pre-revolutionary times when they stood over against the "Intolerable
Acts" and say absolutely "NO!"
And with good reason.
Peace and love to you, my dear colleagues,
Marilyn
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 13:47:43 -0800 (PST) "W. J." <synergi at yahoo.com
<http://us.mc593.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=synergi@yahoo.com> > writes:
In order to control or authorize use of intellectual property, you have
first to be able to claim copyright. That's why we printed a (possibly
defective) copyright notice on the Social Process Triangles in 1971. This
gives notice of ICA's intent to actually submit copyright documents to the
Library of Congress (which of course we never did--nor does almost anyone
else except Hollywood) and to defend against copyright violations, including
false authorship claims from others and unauthorized changes/usage, by
threatening or engaging in a civil lawsuit--which we have never needed to
do.
Most copyright violation lawsuits seem to be over 'piracy' or unauthorized
reproduction of goods worth multimillions of dollars, or the creation of a
black market which deprives copyright owners of significant unrealized
income.
Strangely, the ICA-USA's previous board of directors (before the recent
'regime change' or mass departure of the recently dominant faction) seemed
to be obsessed with defending their imagined 'intellectual property rights'
from unauthorized use--by us! Smelled to me like a corporatist mindset had
taken over the board. Thankfully they're gone. Maybe the new board would
like to clarify their new stance.
Marshall
Charles, indeed we 'ripped off' a lot of theologians and other authors in
the old days, but one could make the point that in popularizing their work
we gave those guys a lot of free publicity and thus increased their book
sales. Tillich, Boulding, cummings, Hesse et al should be grateful.
Sometimes we played by the rules. I got a letter signed by Aaron Copeland
giving us his permission to use 'Fanfare for the Common Man' without paying
a licensing fee.
_____
From: R Williams <rcwmbw at yahoo.com>
To: Order Ecumenical Community <oe at wedgeblade.net>
Sent: Wed, February 24, 2010 5:07:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] IP rights to Social Process Triangles
Charles,
I agree with everything you say. However, it may be that the ICA needs to
assure that someone other than the ICA does not claim proprietary rights to
the material and then try to restrict the right of all of us to use it.
ICA's intent then would be to protect if for our use rather than to prohibit
if from being used by others.
Randy
--- On Tue, 2/23/10, Charles or Doris Hahn <cdhahn at flash.net> wrote:
From: Charles or Doris Hahn <cdhahn at flash.net>
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] IP rights to Social Process Triangles
To: "Order Ecumenical Community" <oe at wedgeblade.net>
Date: Tuesday, February 23, 2010, 9:08 PM
I find this chatter really interesting. When we were working on all those
projects, we just assumed that the products, i.e. the Social Process
Triangles, the New Religious Mode, etc. belonged to the world. How many
papers or chapters of books did we use in our courses without secureing
permission, and giving only the authors name. It seems to me that we should
be generous enough to ask only that the The Institute of Cultural Affairs be
mentioned or credited. I cannot believe that we would stick to the letter
of the law on getting permission and giving total copyright documentation.
The stuff is yours and mine, and it belongs to humankind.
Charles Hahn
_____
From: Wilson Priscilla <Pris at TeamTechPress.com>
To: Order Ecumenical Community <oe at wedgeblade.net>
Sent: Tue, February 23, 2010 5:06:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] IP rights to Social Process Triangles
I used the triangles in The Facilitative Way...giving credit to the
international research of the Institute of Cultural Affairs. Jenkins have a
whole book on the triangles titled The Social Process Triangles. We checked
with Lyn Edwards before printing The Facilitative Way and she gave her
"permission."
So many people worked on creating those...they have to be "corporate"
property.
When we worked on The Facilitative Way we changed some titles, but kept the
dynamics the same. We've been told that our chapter on the triangles is very
helpful. We listened to clients when working on titles.
Priscilla Wilson
On Feb 23, 2010, at 3:51 PM, Herman Greene wrote:
Is their any problem in using the social process triangles? Is anyone
claiming a copyright to the triangles?
Thanks,
Herman
_____________________________________________
Herman F. Greene, Esq.
Greene Law, PLLC
2516 Winningham Drive
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
919-624-0579 (ph)
919-942-4358 (f)
Skype: hgreene-nc
hgreene at greenelawnc.com
www.greenelawnc.com
_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
OE at wedgeblade.net
<http://us.mc593.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=OE@wedgeblade.net>
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
Priscilla Wilson
Mission Hills, KS
913-522-3004
Pris at TeamTechPress.com
<http://us.mc593.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Pris@TeamTechPress.com>
www.teamtechpress.com <http://www.teamtechpress.com/>
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
OE at wedgeblade.net
<http://us.mc593.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=OE@wedgeblade.net>
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
Marilyn R. Crocker, Ed.D
Crocker & Associates, Inc.
123 Sanborn Road
West Newfield, ME 04095
(207) 793-3711
____________________________________________________________
Nutrition
<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2142/c?cp=YZWyysDinnZ4jzIU_EAOaQAAJ1CHp
wdQqk8hRfAnAL67CbcJAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASQwAAAAA=>
Improve your career health. Click now to study nutrition!
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
OE at wedgeblade.net
<http://us.mc593.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=OE@wedgeblade.net>
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100225/a24226c4/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 1422 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100225/a24226c4/attachment-0004.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 1523 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100225/a24226c4/attachment-0005.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 396 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100225/a24226c4/attachment-0006.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 341 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100225/a24226c4/attachment-0007.gif>
More information about the OE
mailing list