permaculture

[Marsha Hanzi <hanzibra@svn.com.br>]

eric + michiko escreveu:

>
>
> I had a similar reaction, but I think the last part of the post had the
> solution.
>
> from Scott's post, Bill wrote:
> > It would be refreshing if people wanting to publish would create their own
> > material and did not plagiarise mine.
>
> I do have a problem with such strong protection of one's ideas (beyond
> death?), but I can also understand how Bill must feel when there are lots
> of people blatantly profiting from his labors.  I also feel that it's hard
> to complain about a copyright on "permaculture" when we aren't coming up
> with equally brilliant and useful ideas.  (etc.)

     Copywriting books is absolutely acceptable within our ethics, only fair 
to the
author, and Bill is right at  being irritated with  people using his material
verbatim.    Copywriting the curriculum, however, touches our ethic.  If, as 
he himself
insists, that PC is a "give away" movement, not centralized nor hierarchical 
( the
first PC magainze in Brazil carries a recent  interview with him where he 
says exactly
that), then controlling the curriculum is like controlling the right and the 
freedom of
all of us to adapt this course to our own situation, needs, and talents. 
That's where
we feel that "there's something wrong in all this , but I'm not sure exactly 
what".
Because there can also be the case where people misunderstand PC and 
publish-- as has
happened in Brazil-- something with this name which  leads to 
misunderstanding ( in
this  case it was a booklet about organic fruit growing).  We will NEVER 
really resolve
the conflict between  maintaining the spirit and principles of PC at the same 
time
permitting it to evolve.There will always be a encessary tension here.  And 
if it
evolves beyond what would still be acceptable as PC-- so what?  If we look 
from a
longer timescale, maybe PC had a specific role to play at  a specific  moment 
in
time... If we crystallize it ,it will become historical, as all advances ( and
"devances") of human dvelopment have been, and we will talk of it in the 
present and
the past tense...If  we permit it to evolve, even risking it changing form 
over time,
we will talk of it also in the future tense-- but then it my stop being PC... 
It's a
bit hard to formulate, but has to do with fixing the form. The danger of 
labeling.  But
there is also the inconvenience of not labeling...PC is a VERY useful 
starting point, a
clear body of knowledge, material published, etc.  But it is a starting 
point, for us
and for our students.  Everyone goes on from there in one direction or 
another...It is
not the end of the line...So we will define, now with Bill's passing the 
(what's the
expression you use in the relay races?), if it will be only the starting 
point,or if it
will expand to include the continuation.  It has potential for both at the 
moment.Both
options are valid.
    Another point which is directly relevant:  who will give the diplomas, 
etc? If they
are emitted by institutions who are not directly involved with the work of 
that
professional, only because that institution is "certified", I think we will 
fall into
the same academic trap where a degree is a degree when we know that this does 
not
relate to competence...I personally vote that the professional be certified 
only by
other professionals who personallyknow his/her work, and not centralized  PC
Institutes...

Marsha