permaculture

[Scott Pittman <pci@permaculture-inst.org>]

At 04:45 PM 6/6/00 +0000, you wrote:
> Copyright is a legal construct used to protect
> intellectual property for the purpose of commerce.
>
> If Mollison and/or Holmgren want to protect the word
> "permaculture" in this context, then they certainly have
> reasonable claim to do so. However, each of the assembled ideas within
> the practice of permaculture is more like parts of a shared body of
> wisdom which arise from human experience upon this living planet. People
> were placing swales on contour and growing banana circles before Bill was
> born. Is each individual concept touched upon by permaculture (and often
> shared by other uncopywrited ecological design practices) to be only
> contained within a legally restricted, copyrighted label? This seems
> conterpurpose to permaculture ethics and natural patterns, smacking of
> inefficient centralized monopoly. There is no legal standing for such a
> restrictive appoach.

I assume your question is rhetorical but your basis for this discussion
is baseless - no one is trying to change anything about the copyright of
permaculture.  The conditions are clearly stated in Permaculture
a Designers' Manual page ix.  Everyone has got their
knickers in a twist over an article Bill wrote in the International
Permaculture Journal in which he insisted that his work,
his published work, and his curriculum developed by
him be credited to him and that he be asked for permission
before others use his work, period..  What is so difficult to
understand?  I also beg to differ with you on your legal
scholarship, there is plenty of precedence for such a restrictive
approach and is used by corporations all the time.  I also find it
tiresome that people are now trying to denigrate the contribution that
Bill has made by finding examples like swales and banana circles to show
that permaculture was not an original idea.  Bill has never claimed
to have discovered fire, swales, or banana circles what he has done along
with David Holmgrin is to develop and articulate a revolutionary design
system, and no one should try to take that away from him!  It is
great hindsight to say that permaculture is the collected wisdom of the
past but if this collected wisdom hadn't been collected by Bill and
articulated in his books and lectures most of us wouldn't have stumbled
upon it.   

> Permaculture ethics say nothing about
> maintenance of currently-existing hierarchy, unless of course, that
> hierarchy is the most effective approach for care of the earth and its
> inhabitants. Truth will out, and good design is our universal, rightful
> inheritance based upon patterns in nature, no matter who expresses and
> copyrights _expression_ of that awareness. It's like trying to copyright
> "justice" or "efficiency".

More rhetorical blather.

> Scott wrote:
> "There is the opposite problem of those whose egos don't allow them
> to
> give credit where it is due so rather than call it permaculture they lay
> claim to ideas formulated by others.  I guess the high road approach
> would be to say "oh, well! as long as the word gets out." 
> But it seems to me that the greater the ground swell named permaculture
> the greater the effect on the world at large.  I has been a long
> struggle for many who have carried the design process and teaching around
> the world where permaculture is becoming well known and a common name
> shared by all of us permaculturalists that I would hate to see
> lost.  That commonality in and of itself is a critical
> part of creating a borderless sustainable future for people."
>
> Yes, share credit where credit is due. There is, however, no reason why
> someone couldn't call themselves an "ecological designer" and
> use some concepts found within the practice of permaculture in their
> professional work without commercially representing it as permaculture.
> If we are to have a "borderless sustainable future", no one
> needs accept attempts to restrict their design practice beyond the
> reasonable right to do so.

I don't think anyone has suggested that certain concepts are sacrosanct
and in many cases it is better that they don't call it permaculture
because nine times out of ten it ain't.

> Scott also wrote:
>
> "It has been a long time since there has been any kind of
> personal
> interaction in the U.S. permaculture family and there are many
> issues
> that could be discussed and shared."
>
> Is the global permaculture community a "family" in which the
> the next generation gets to freely live their own creative lives and we
> share common ethics and practices, or is permaculture a commercial
> corporation in which distribution rights are controlled and limited by a
> central power? Or both? There seem to be different conceptions of
> permaculture simultaneously held and often within the same person.

It's that rhetoric thing again.  Who has even intimated that the
next generation, or even the seventh generation give up their creative
lives?  I also haven't heard anyone talk about commercial
corporations or central power control?  The final sentence seems a
non-sequitur.  

> I recommend that those who consider themselves
> part of permaculture get clear on what the rightful parameters of
> permaculture actually are, so that its power and benefit are optimized.
> This will yield support for the earth and its inhabitants rather than
> confusing or restricting our personal practices because the
> copywrite/ownership of permaculture sprawls beyond those rightful
> parameters.

I would greatly appreciate your clear and rightful thoughts on what the
parameters of permaculture are especially since you are recommending it
you must have done it.

Scott










> Thanks for this vital exploration,
> Akiva Werbalowsky
> Ojai, CA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > From: "Lawrence F. London, Jr."
> > <lflondon@mindspring.com>
>
> > On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:23:44 +1000, Pacific
> > Edge Permaculture
> > <pacedge@magna.com.au> wrote:
>
> > >The copyright claim, whether well
> > intentioned for the purposes of
> > >maintaining quality standards or for more self serving reasons, the
> > effect is the same.  . .  a decline in PC. If pushed further it
> > will see a  
> > number of legal counter claims from those who have helped shaped it and
> > it herald the widespread abandonment of the use of name in the activities
> > of many more.
>
>
> > I think it is very shortsighted to make this
> > statement. To throw
> > Bill's copyright to the winds would be, essentially,  to abandon
> > the
> > very standards and principles that have made this movement grow
> > steadily in acceptance and use since it began. To open this
> > Pandora's
> > Box would be a huge mistake. "You never miss it until it's
> > gone", you
> > know.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to permaculture as:
> pci@permaculture-inst.org
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> $subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe send email to lyris@franklin.oit.unc.edu with message text
> containing: subscribe permaculture