permaculture

[Toby Hemenway <hemenway@jeffnet.org>]

on 7/18/01 10:10 PM, Robert Jensen at robertscroft@hotmail.com wrote:

> 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.

Having recently gotten a firm education in copyright law, I want to
emphasize a couple of points here so people won't be intimidated by spurious
legal threats, and so we don't waste time about non-issues. Copyright only
pertains to an author's original wording or art. That means you can't
photocopy *and then publish* pages from the DM or any other book, and you
can't extensively quote Bill without permission, or claim the quote as your
own work. But that's about all copyright covers. Anyone may write about
permaculture in their own words, paraphrase the ideas described in the DM,
describe herb spirals, guilds, and so on. There is nothing to prevent anyone
from using their own words to help propagate, via writing, teaching, or
design, the ideas of permaculture.

The law says: It doesn't matter who thought up an idea, how much time or
effort someone spent making a discovery, what the "underlying intellectual
property" is, or who has written about it previously. Anyone can legally use
their own words to describe any idea, process, system, fact, concept, and so
on, whether it is copyrighted, trademarked, or whatever. That's how ideas
get spread, and it's a process encouraged by the law (obviously, it's proper
to cite the source).

>> My greatest concern to Bill's trademarking "Permaculture Design
>> Course" and "Permaculture" is that teachers and designers would have
>> to pay royalties.

The word permaculture is not being trademarked at this time and probably can
never be. The trademark attempt only pertains to the phrases "permaculture
design course" and "permaculture design." But any fears of not being able to
do business or teaching under the name permaculture are misplaced; if they
are trademarked, one can either apply for approval or not use those phrases.
And I doubt if those phrases can be trademarked if there is well-organized
opposition from those who have used those phrases professionally for many
years without opposition from Bill.

>>>>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.

It is common practice for teachers in all fields to photocopy teaching
materials (handouts) with or without permission. There is a large body of
law around the practice, and most schools have policies about it (just check
the web!). The law and practice boil down to: get permission when there's
time; always attribute the source; most cases are never prosecuted because
education is given a lot of leeway; and it is very unusual (and considered
bad form) for a publisher to ask for money when a teacher asks permission to
hand out limited numbers of photocopies to students. The informal rule seems
to be, if a teacher hands out a few pages or even a chapter from a book, the
law and the any reasonable author turn a blind eye; more than that and the
students should purchase the book.

> 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?

Currently the DM is out of print in the US, and the Intro to PC is nearly
impossible to get. Under those circumstances, the law allows photocopying
without permission. The publishers must keep it in print if they wish to
prevent photocopying. Also, it seems unreasonable to ask students to pay $60
for the DM just to obtain a few pages from it, and the law makes allowances
for this. (in my courses, we usually ask students to buy the Intro, but now
we can't get it easily).

I imagine that short courses are exempt from the approval requirement, as
they are not certification courses.

>> 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.

Bill and Lisa (the "Institute") have for a while now expected PDC teachers
to submit their curriculum for approval. If their trademark is approved,
that gives them the legal clout to enforce this policy. Skye's recent
heartbreaking post about the Mexicans whose money was taken by the Institute
indicates administrative ineptitude at the Institute, and makes me nervous
about their ability to do a good job of licensing and approval. And earlier
I've voiced my concerns about personal biases that may affect approval.
Other than that, I'm fully supportive of an international body to maintain
PDC standards.

Also, remember that trademark and copyright are two very different things.
>From the Nolo Press web site:

"Copyright is a legal device that gives the creator of a work of art or
literature, or a work that conveys information or ideas, the right to
control how that work is used."

"A trademark is a distinctive word, phrase, logo, Internet domain name,
graphic symbol, slogan or other device that is used to identify the source
of a product and to distinguish a manufacturer's or merchant's products from
others."

Toby