Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: What Bill says

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Robert Jensen" <robertscroft@hotmail.com>
  • To: permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: What Bill says
  • Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:10:02 +1000


This whole debate turns on two issues:
1. The need to respect an authors work, and
2. The propogation of a brilliant set of ideas.

My thoughts on various comments are below:


From: 1earth permaculture <permaculture1@start.com.au>
Reply-To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: Re: What Bill says
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:39:02 +1000

From my reading of that spiel, the Manual is the curriculum of the
Design Course, and that any other permaculture "curriculum must be by
application to the author".
has this been the practise in the past?


Does that mean if we want to run a PDC course or even a short course
on a particular aspect eg How To Build a Herb Spiral, we first must
have it approved by Bill and his Institute?

The two comments "nor can any group of people substantially alter or
assert ownership of the text" and "people need to write their own
curriculum and textbooks and not plagiarise my work" seem to be at
odds.
I disagree, I think the two quotes are inclusive.


My reading is that if we want to continue under the permaculture
umbrella as designers and teachers we each have to create our own
textbooks of curriculum, following the principles outlined in Bill's
(and David's) books so as not to "substantially alter" the work, but
not too closely as to be accused of plagiarism. And then submit it to
Bill for approval.
If you did design your own curriculum, why would you need to seek approval for it?

My greatest concern to Bill's trademarking "Permaculture Design
Course" and "Permaculture" is that teachers and designers would have
to pay royalties.
Perhaps this is the nub of many peoples concerns. If a PDC teacher has been copying Bill's work and distributing it to students, then surely that would have breached copyright in the work.

Would it not be a better idea for a teacher to purchase the original PDC notes and books from Bill and sell it on with a markup?

I suppose if these royalties went to an Institute that successfully
administered the curriculum and PDC and higher degrees, then it would
be a good investment. (?) Such an Institute would, if it followed the
principles laid down in the Manual, be democratic and open in its
affairs.
An owner of a copyright does not need to be democratic. In fact the disposal of a property right is usually quite arbitrary and driven by commercial reality, ie; the dreadful $$$$. The fact that Permaculture is a movement which can and does change peoples lives for the better does not mean that the rights to the underlying intellectual property are alientated from their rightful owner. I note that there has been many suggestions here that the underlying intellectual property originated from others beside Bill Mollison.

Permaculture is different things to different people. This is one of
the reasons why it is so successful and has spread so quickly. This is
also why we are asked in our PDC to define the term. It is also why
the PDC courses needs to be administered a hell of a lot better than
they are at present (to avoid the example of a one week PDC courses
when it clearly says 72-hours duration, and the registration of cowboy
PDC teachers and designers).
If teachers of the PDC agree that a common approach is required, then it follows that somehow agreement needs to be reached on funding to allow this to occur. I would think that Royalties might well be the best source of such funds. Whilst also building on a quality product in the PDC manuals from a single source.

This whole situation also reminds me of the current state in the
internet's growth, with companies like Yahoo initially giving it all
away free until it grows to a critical mass, then start charging (for
something that we all created together). The internet is going
through a massive attrition as companies fail and people adjust to the
internet being capitalised and regulated. History repeats, are there
are a lot of similarities between the net and permaculture.

The internet is littered with business models that were not built on a positive cash flow. If you want something to endure, you'd better build a solid base and negative cash flows certainly do not do that.

Bill must be laughing now. He reminds me of ol' Joh Bjelke Petersen
coming out every so often to "feed the chooks" (Joh was an Australian
politician suffering early dementia who was refering to himself giving
press conferences - the media and public were his "chooks" or
chickens).

I think it is bad form to draw such an analogy and I do not think others appreciate such comments.

I do not know what Bill Mollison thinks of all the debate surrounding the whole issue of copyright, yet I would very much welcome his contribution on the subject as it might help others understand how to move forward in a more orderly manner. It might also inject some respect into the debate.

Marcus Webb


__________________________________________________________________
Get your free Australian email account at http://www.start.com.au


---
You are currently subscribed to permaculture as: robertscroft@hotmail.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu
Get the list FAQ at: http://www.ibiblio.org/ecolandtech/documents/permaculture.faq


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page