Send TROM mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of TROM digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re. Patents, Copyrights, ... - (Re: TROM Digest, Vol 137,
Issue 44) (The Resolution of Mind list)
2. ? ;-) Was: Re: Re. Patents, Copyrights, .
(The Resolution of Mind list)
3. Re: (c) ;-) Was: Re: Re. Patents, Copyrights, .
(The Resolution of Mind list)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 17:50:40 +0200
From: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: [TROM1] Re. Patents, Copyrights, ... - (Re: TROM Digest, Vol
137, Issue 44)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed;
delsp=yes
Hi everybody
Recently here on the list Ant Phillips offered to provide LRH material in
"parcels". In my opinion a great idea and seemingly well received so far.
I was sometimes tempted to put in large chunks of text of LRH references
by copy & paste into some of my write-ups as well.
As far as I know, one is allowed by law to cite from works of others as
long as the cite is limited (I do not know which amount is tolerable
here)
and you mention the source or copyright owner.
Often we find a remark in (c)-righted works like this:
"Reproduction in whole or parts of this work is only allowed with the
written consent of the (c)-owner." - something like that.
I would appreciate if anyone who is competent with that legal regulations
could comment. Perhaps the owner or moderator of this list or the server,
because often the people who post anything which violate the laws are not
the
one who get in trouble. In many cases the poster can not even traced
back.
The attorneys do not really care from where they get the money. So, from
the
point of view of the responsible entities:
- What is needed and wanted here?
- Where are the limits of what is tolerable?
- Do you follow a certain policy by which you would like that list
members
behave?
(in general, not only in regard of (c)).
I have tremendous amount of material available, but be by no means
interested
to bring anyone - including myself - in trouble.
From my point of view there is really very much to say about patent and
(c).
In my former career I've been concerned in inventions and patents to a
certain
degree. (I've made about half a dozen minor inventions which are owned by
the company I had worked for. I got a fair financial compensation for
them.)
Never the less I always had the feeling that there is something terribly
wrong
with patents, and (c) as well.
Originally all those laws concerned with that subject may have been meant
for
a good purpose. I'm not even sure about that, but I'm 100% convinced that
those
issues had been, and still are, heavily misused for suppressive purposes.
I strongly believe that any idea, thought or creation (that includes tech
too!) can not be protected by laws. I think in case anyone who is on "do
not
want it to be known"; well then please keep it secret and do not bother
us
with it; use it on yourself and louse yourself up with it to your heart's
content!)
My reasoning is as follows (list may be incomplete):
- It contradicts the rules of "freedom of thought".
- If someone invents something that had been invented prior by another
one,
and the second inventor did not know about it, then the intellectual
value of the second inventor's creative act is equal to the first one.
So why privilege the first one and thus punish the second one?
- (Almost) any invention or creative work ever made is to some extent
inspired
or sparked by the surrounding of the creator. So, to a very high
degree
the
creation is the property of at least the whole fourth dynamic of the
entity.
- The assumption that patent- and (c)- laws further progress is an
outright lie
of the first magnitude! Actually it is exactly to the contrary!
- Last but not least the law-making completely neglects the ideas of
"one-ness",
"first source", collective consciousness, ....
In that respect the actual laws is completely out of any fundamental
reasoning.
It's all solely based on the opinion of some people and certainly not
on
factual
reality. Even conventional science in the meantime can prove and thus
accepts the
existence of "morphogenetic fields", a group mind, ... In that respect
those
laws are outdated; no more than a relic of a barbaric past we all
hoped
to be
long gone.
Sorry for sounding somehow polemic here and not directly related to TROM.
But the grounds seem to be just right to me.
Robin
-----
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 14:00:02 +0200, <[email protected]>
wrote:
Send TROM mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of TROM digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: An offer to Trommers --a weekly book chapter starting
with Dianetics 55! (The Resolution of Mind list)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 08:45:41 +0200
From: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TROM1] An offer to Trommers --a weekly book chapter
starting with Dianetics 55!
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20160328/7101086b/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
End of TROM Digest, Vol 137, Issue 44
*************************************
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 20:28:06 +0200
From: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: [TROM1] ? ;-) Was: Re: Re. Patents, Copyrights, .
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20160328/6ebae245/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 15:59:36 -0400
From: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]>
To: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [TROM1] (c) ;-) Was: Re: Re. Patents, Copyrights, .
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
When it comes to anything to do with the church of scientology,* nothing*
they say or do is without fraud, lies, deceit, extortion or entrapment,
coercion, a screwing, and or every other kind of dirty trick imaginable.
That should actually say, to the average person, the type of dirty tricks
the cos can pull, are unimaginable.
The average person does not know how to think that way.
The type of dirty tricks that the cos can pull, are only imaginable to a
person within the heirarchy of scn.
There is not one single contract or agreement or representation, they
make
with any one, including scientologists from newbies and up, and
copyrights
that are made in good faith (bonafide). NONE!
None are legal if you know the true law about contracts and the different
types of fraud.
David
.
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 2:28 PM, The Resolution of Mind list <
[email protected]> wrote:
*************
The following message is relayed to you by [email protected]
************
?
Dear Trommers,
This message raises an interesting point. I believe an artist, be it
author, pop band, singer, composer, et cetera should be paid for the
work
they do. That seems to me primarily to be the purpose of the copyright
laws
(probably vary from country to country although I believe there is an
international standard).
That the heirs to the creator of works of art/literature should receive
money for doing nothing perhaps is another question, discussable for a
long
time.
It is true that I sent you all part of a copyright work, and it was
probably too long to really comply with the exceptions there are to the
copyright laws. It was copyrighted? by Ron Hubbard, who is dead. I
believe
that the copyright is claimed to be owned by some legal body.
The Internet site Scientolipedia has published some works which were
copyrighted? by L Ron Hubbard, included amongst them is Minshull's book
*How
to Choose Your People*.
There are certain procedures (legal) open to those who feel their
copyright has been violated.
One of those is that if a person or body feels aggrieved in such a way
it/he/she can (in the USA) demand that the site publishing copyright
work
be taken down by the service provider. However the person making that
claim
must take action legally within a short period. Otherwise the site has
to
be put up again.
This procedure happened recently to the Scientolipedia site, *but* no
further action was taken by the church and the site was put up again by
the
service provider!
That's interesting. The point is that after L Ron Hubbard's death the
church was taken over with a certain amount of "hanky-panky" a.k.a.
dirty
tricks. Since that time, to the best of my knowledge, although the
church
has taken legal action with regard to copyright breach they have never
taken it to a level where they convinced a court that they had the
copyright. So there's a theory that they can't legally show they have
the
copyright!
For some of what I've just stated see:
http://scientolipedia.org/info/Church_of_Scientology_DMCA_Takedown_of_Scientolipedia
My main concern here is that the man who took over the church David
Miscavige, who is virtually a dictator, has altered Ron's works. Thus my
concern to promulgate unadulterated versions of basics of Scientology.
All best wishes,
Ant.
Antony A Phillips
* < mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>> *
www.antology.info
At 17:50 28-03-2016, The Resolution of Mind list wrote:
Recently here on the list Ant Phillips offered to provide LRH material
in
"parcels". In my opinion a great idea and seemingly well received so
far.
I was sometimes tempted to put in large chunks of text of LRH references
by copy & paste into some of my write-ups as well.
As far as I know, one is allowed by law to cite from works of others as
long as the cite is limited (I do not know which amount is tolerable
here)
and you mention the source or copyright owner.
Often we find a remark in (c)-righted works like this:
"Reproduction in whole or parts of this work is only allowed with the
written consent of the (c)-owner." - something like that.
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20160328/93b607f2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
End of TROM Digest, Vol 137, Issue 45
*************************************
