Hi Ian...
From: Ian Lillington <ianl@internode.on.net>
Reply-To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: Re: permaculture trademark alert
1. It could be that the Mollisons' applications are a 'friendly' attempt, to head off 'hostile' attempts like we saw last year - ie. they are doing this on behalf of us all, the permaculture family.
I did wonder about this. It doesn't appear to be the consensus though.
The idea was raised last October at the convergence... that the word could be trademarked then placed in the public domain.
(If so, it would have helped to tell us first, but that doesn't ever seem to be Bill's style.)
Thinking back over the mini-controversies which have stirred up the permaculture community recently, I realise that this non-communication by Bill (and Lisa?)... should I say the Permaculture Institute rather than personalising it.... is part of the problem.
I have in mind the non-communication about the new PDC approval regime... the issuing of certificates stuff... about which the Institute claimed an inability to communicate with the Australian permaculture community when it was obvious that there were existing communications channels.
Would someone like to ask them about this?
I have emailed the Institute with a set of questions to obtain their feedback for the Permaculture International newsletter. This I addressed specifically to Bill or Lisa. I have learned that both are away at present, so I don't anticipate a speedy response.
In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if I receive no response. Or, if I do get one, I won't be surprised if it is abusive. When the trademarking of the logo was an issue, I received through the post an abusive letter from Lisa for daring to write about it and a statement from Bill verifying the trademarking and proposing strongly that discussion cease immediately.
My attitude to this, I guess, was shaped by life as a journalist... the letters appear to me to be rather weak attempts at intimidation and a rather degrading attempt to stop public discussion. I thought them absolutely incompatible with an organisation claiming the stature of the Permaculture Institute... totally unprofessional. So much for any concepts of the public or of permaculture stakeholder's right to know... to learn the facts and other people's opinions... so much for any concept of democratic process from the so-called permaculture leadership. It reminded me of nothing more than the type of thing some seedy politician would do.
The letters failed to intimidate me. I thought about my role in promoting communication among permaculture's stakeholders and of putting up difficult issues and questions... some of which have smouldered below the permaculture surface for years... for discussion and, hopefully, clarification and resolution. I realised that the Mollisons were indulging in nothing more than a 'shoot the messenger' exercise and that if the permaculture community wasn't resolute enough to cope with a little questioning then it was in a weak state indeed. I have continued to promote discussion of these issues on the grounds that we need to resolve them if possible, or to temporarily place them by consensus in a 'too hard at the present time' box and to move on.
After the Institute's letters I revisited the respect I had for Bill... a respect based on his record of daring to question the status quo and of standing up in the face of the ridicule of experts, yet of persisting. I realised that I still retained this respect... and I continue to do so... and should accept his aberrant behaviour as part of his character. Why should people of Bill's stature not be entitled to the failings that the rest of us have? If we are all entitled to the usual number of mistakes and instances of bizarre behaviour.... and can be forgiven by our contemporaries and colleagues and all move on... then why shouldn't Bill?
I still hold this to be true... but tales of legal threats from the Institute's lawyer reported online by other correspondents bring to me a feeling of unease... a feeling that something is not right with the approach of the Institute. And, still, the Institute fails to communicate with the large group of stakeholders Bill laboured for so many years to create.
but it is probably inevitable that sooner or later, we will have Mollison approved PDC's and other PDC's.
This has already been raised by a number of people... never openly because, I think, their ideas are still in formulation... and, like you an, I believe that it may come to pass.
...Russ
|
