[Oe List ...] Salmon RUSHING IN WHERE. . . STANDING BETWEEN THE NO LONGER AND THE NOT YET . .

James Wiegel jfwiegel at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 26 17:47:50 CST 2010


Bill, how did you manage to send me a message from March 24, 2010 . . . things must be moving quickly in Kansas

Ah, all the earth . . .  I think there are 2 levels to this . . . sort of like all is good vs. I am received . . . on the one hand, we did a lot of work (our thinking and wrestling as a "movement" that was freely given (actually, a lot of us not only freely gave, but paid for it).  At the same time, it has been the things we have also taken ownership for that have survived, got out, perhaps made a difference.

Back when ICA USA was wrestling with naming ToP methods (when Winning Through Participation was first published, late 80's) one of the realizations was that "we" had already put the methods "out there" and many who had been associated with "the order and the movement" were using them (and sharing them with others).  My sense, at the time, however, was that if you hadn't "been there" or "known someone" you didn't have access to them.

Creating the term "ToP" and creating the series of "ToP courses" and the network of "ToP trainers" in the USA and the parallel efforts by ICA's around the world (particularly Canada and UK, I think) created a new focus, gave those involved something to "own" and get out there . . .

As a result, here in the US, we have over 16,000 people trained, just since 2000, and a network of 150 trainers and over 20 "regional registrars" offering the training around the country.

Given the times in which we live, and the space, what other aspects of "our" living archive do we need to take new ownership of and get out into the hands and hearts of people who care?  How do we use "branding" and "trademarking" and "copyrighting" to give access to those who are looking for what we (may) have to offer?  
 Jim


"If you really want to succeed, then you have to have the big heart, heroic will, tenacity, courage, and commitment to fearlessly engage with the evolutionary process until something profound, mysterious, and extraordinary happens that cannot be undone."  Andrew Cohen


Jim Wiegel
401 North Beverly Way, Tolleson, Arizona 85353-2401
+1  623-936-8671   +1  623-363-3277
jfwiegel at yahoo.com www.partnersinparticipation.com




________________________________
From: William Salmon <wsalmon at cox.net>
To: Ecumenical Order <oe at wedgeblade.net>
Sent: Wed, March 24, 2010 1:34:52 PM
Subject: [Oe List ...] Salmon RUSHING IN WHERE. . .


Colleagues, 
    I find the conversation about 
who owns the "rights" to use our inventions interesting. There was a time when 
we affirmed that, "All the People, All the Goods, and All the Proprietary Rights 
BELONGED TO ALL THE PEOPLE." 
    Strange, isn't it? Now, we're 
concerned about defining the new moment in history, but are we using old 
definitions that could have killed us in the first place? Is there 
something about having a joyful conception, a wonderful gestation period, and 
then a difficult, extra-long, and troubled birth process that makes us want to 
own the baby? Whose baby is it, really? 
    Many years ago I published an 
article in a UM publication titled, "Steal My Stuff, Please!." Since that time, 
I'll admit that I've struggled over my rights as an author and publisher of a 
workbook, and the development of the IHOP Bible Study, The IHOP Bible Study 
Commentary, and nearly 450 sermon outlines using Gut-Trip Analysis 
commentary for SermonStarter. 
    I think I'll leave it where I 
still want people to steal it and use it. There is a lot of wonderful, creative, 
unique, profound insights to be garnered by those who are awakened to the 
significance of what is the result of an Order education. 
    Wad U think? 
    Bill Salmon
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: R Williams 
To: Order 
Ecumenical Community 
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:07 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://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
>>
>
>Priscilla Wilson
>Mission Hills, KS
>913-522-3004
>Pris at TeamTechPress.com
>www.teamtechpress.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Inline 
>        Attachment Follows-----
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>OE 
>        mailing list
>OE at wedgeblade.net
>http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
> 

________________________________
 _______________________________________________
OE mailing 
list
OE at wedgeblade.net
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net

________________________________
 
Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2707 - Release Date: 
02/24/10 07:34:00



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100226/58c710fb/attachment.html>


More information about the OE mailing list