permaculture

[eric + michiko <emstorm@metro.net>]

Marcus wrote:
> BTW, I never did get an answer - what is the symbolism in the snake logo?

I think you did.  Scott sent one on 7/20/00. (see copy below)

I am getting much clearer on all of this.  Thanks to all of the input.
Sorry if this is being redundant, but I don't want to miss anything.  My
understanding now is that:

- Anyone can use the term "Permaculture", though ethics would suggest that
you know what you're talking about if you do so.  Much like the word
"organic", "Permaculture" is now in the public domain and may evolve over
time, for better or worse.

- As a graduate of PcDs, I may teach Permaculture as I understand it, in my
words and in any way I choose to -- zone six and all.  Again, ethics would
suggest that I not stray too far form the original intent of Permaculture
or call it something else.

- As a graduate of PcDs, and with more than two years experience, I have
the option of applying for a degree, which does not give me any additional
rights or privileges other than as proof of said experience.

- Use of any of Bill's (or other's) written or illustrated materials
without significant change requires Bill's (or other's) express written
permission.  Given significant reworking of those ideas, anyone may write
about Pc, explaining it as they see fit.  There would be no legal reason to
use another word, though again there are ethical considerations.

- The egg / snake logo is trade marked by Bill, though other designs with
the same symbolism but significant visual differences could be created and
used (and trade marked).


I am still a little unclear about the line between Bill's and Scott's wish
that teachers follow the curriculum in the DM closely and use the two week
intensive format and the copyright protection of that material.  Is the
issue of copyright irrelevant if it is spoken "plagiarism" and not written
or copied?  As long as no written outline of the curriculum is given to
students, can the curriculum be follow exactly as laid out in the DM?  Is
it necessary to reformulate and reword the Pc principles when explaining
Pc?  Etc.

I am left with the main impression that Bill has no legal rights to control
the way "permaculture" is used or explained or represented.  This takes the
steam out of many of the past discussions on this list about what and how
to teach Pc.  The copyright and trademark issues simply refer to wording
and illustrations, not ideas and information.  Again, I do not intend to
encourage dicrespect of what Bill has done; I just want to clear the
muddiness of previous discussions.  I personally have no intention of
significantly changing the way I explain Pc.

Eric Storm

***************************
Scott's reply to Marcus' question

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 10:47:03 -0600
To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
From: Scott Pittman <pci@permaculture-inst.org>
Subject: Re: Logo symbolism

The symbolism is explained on page xi of the designers manual.  This logo 
is a registered trademark of the Permaculture Institute  of Australia and 
Bill Mollison and can only be reproduced with permission of those parties.

Scott Pittman

********************************