Allwebco Web Templates · Build your own toolbar · Financial Data · Audio, Fonts, Clipart
powered by
bravenet.com
|
|
OML Archives-
Subject: Re: call from WRM - Wed, 24 Jan 1996 01:18:22 -0500
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 01:18:22 -0500
From: pore@mainelink.net
Subject: Re: call from WRM
To: orgonomy@jefferson.village.virginia.edu
Sender: owner-orgonomy@jefferson.village.virginia.edu
OML and Jim Martin
On Tue, Jan 23, 1996, Jim Martin <flatland@mail.mcn.org> wrote:
>>> As someone who has donated hundreds of dollars and who is a
card-carrying "friend of the WR Museum", I'm insulted that the WRM still
accuses people of "stealing" WRM "property". Where? Who? Who did you talk
to? >>>>
First Jim, I also am a member of Friends WRM and I didn't say they said
someone was stealing. I said that those who publish copyright material are
stealing. The Who was Mary Henderson at the WRM who called me and was
asking about what was going on with someone on the internet proposing to
use a scanner to publish Reich's books and/or publishings on the internet.
They did not infer anything about Contact with Space. I asked them what
their interpretation of the copyright of that book was since it was part of
public record in the courts. You or Ken refer to material in Boston. What
about the material in Portland, Maine federal court where the trial took
place? I also asked about the will of Reich being public record and she
said "they have copyright to everything they sell at the bookstore" . She
also referred me to contact MBH about the will etc. as she will be in Maine
in early February.
>>>> Objectively, the WRM has done nothing but suppress the work of Reich.
Only four of his books are in print. The WRM's reprints aren't cutting it,
grossly expensive, and xerox always makes a writer look like a crank.
Contact With Space is being reprinted in German! What about in English?
>>>>
"Nothing but suppress" you say. I think this is an exaggeration but I agree
that I would like to see much more available as I have said that I
mentioned to MBH that it would be great to have his works put on CD-ROM.
After thinking more about the conversation she mentioned it was to be
published by Farrar Straus. I only assumed it in German as I had posted a
note in the pore recent book section that I received from germany by email
about several books being published in german of WR's later work. But upon
checking that post it appears those works are published by some other
source. So maybe Mary Henderson was referring to a publishing in English.
She actually didn't say what language.
>>>> I tried working in a positive direction. As I said, I've offered to
help them issue their own paperback books. It's like talking to a stone.
Just look at this reply to the mistranslations. Cutting Wolfe's heirs out
of the royalties is INEXCUSABLE. Wolfe gave everything he had, financially,
physically, emotionally to Orgonomy. And how, might I ask, can we point out
the discrepancies between editions without getting sued?
>>>>
"It's like talking to a stone" you say. Well I don't agree totally. I have
had positive conversations with her many times and have had many good times
at conferences at WRM and visiting the WRM. I certainly do not consider her
a perfect person for her job and she obviously has her faults as do we all.
I also am not naieve to believe that all are treated the same way by MBH. I
was present at some of the court hearings between her and Eva Reich in the
70's in Farmington, Maine concerning access to the WRITF archives. I was
their with Eva Reich and Bill Moise and others supporting Eva. MBH can have
a very abrasive and cold manner to others and did to me that day. But even
after that she invited a group of students and myself to a special seminar
at Orgonon in 1975. It was I believe the first since Reich had died.
You quote someone else's reaction on OML as "Cutting Wolfe's heirs out of
the royalties is INEXCUSABLE" and I agree with this whole heartedly as I
personally feel that no one should be robbed of their copyright royalties
even if a loop hole allows it like this. However loop-holes in the law are
reality. MBH used it immorally in some of our interpretations of what
should be right. Loop-holes may allow some of Reich's work to be published
that may of been put in the public domain. As for copyright rules I am not
a lawyer but I feel if WR had a copyright on a book that he submitted as
evidence it doesn't mean he signed away his copyright to the book. Does a
person have to sign away all rights to their copyright to make it fully
public?? I do not know these answers and do not portend to know. I
certainly feel that his Will and Testament is public record just like his
Response to the Court, but that is a far cry from what they were concerned
about when they called me to ask about someone wanting or suggesting that
WR work be scanned and published on the Internet. For the response I made,
I told them that I was aware of what they mentioned concerning the scanner
idea. I told Mary Henderson that they should not worry or be concerned at
this point because it is only conversation and that no one has actually
done this and that no one is definitely planning to do this at this time.
>>>>> For instance, when Joel Carlinsky broke into the WRMuseum and stole
documents, Higgins didn't know what had been taken, because 10-15 years
after assuming control, she still hadn't gotten around to cataloguing the
collection! She even talks about this in the introduction to Beyond
Psychology. >>>>>
I agree that the above would be unheard of in any estate not to catalogue
all the contents of the estate upon death. MBH wasn't the trustee at the
time of death and wasn't the trustee until Eva Reich appointed her. Eva
Reich was the trustee for a a few years. Did Eva catalogue it all?? And if
Eva hadn't, it sure is not a justified excuse for MBH to have not
catalogued it during the 10-15 years that she was trustee. I agree that
not cataloguing the works is INEXCUSABLE especially if your role as trustee
(executrix) is to protect the works as dictated in WR Will.
>>>>> Jogg, I don't agree that every word ever written by Reich is the
personal property of Mary Boyd Higgins. >>>
I don't either and I never said that nor did they. Mary Henderson said they
have copyright on everything they sell. This may be true for over ninety
percent of what they sell but I agree with you that certain court records
are public.
>>>> Court Documents are part of the public record and were written as such
by Reich. Do you really think that when I reprinted "New Laws Needed to
Restrain Pathological Power Drunkeness" I was stealing from the Museum, or
preventing a kid from taking a walk in the woods? I did so at the personal
request of Eva Reich. >>>>
I feel like I hit a cord here by your reaction. But did I ever say that Jim
Martin was stealing?? Please quote me where I said that. I am sorry but I
don't know where or when you reprinted "New Laws Needed to Restrain
Pathological Power Drunkenness" and I haven't seen your reprint to make
such a comment.
>>>>Consider the list of people Higgins has sued or threatened with suit:
Eva Reich, Elsworth Baker, Myron Sharaf, Jerome Eden, Jim DeMeo, I could go
on and on. It's like a who's who of orgonomy. Meanwhile, visitors to the
Museum are told that "no one is competant to carry on orgonomic research"
and Higgins regularly slanders honest and decent researchers outside the
cult of personality she has established at Orgonon, installing herself as
channeller and oracle for the great guru Wilhelm. >>>>>>
At this time I can't comment your statment fully except that I can relay
the my feelings during a conference I attended at WRM. Myron Sharof was
invited to speak during the summer his new book was published. I was left
feeling more like he had been invited to a lions den. He agreed when we
spoke privately outdoors at the museum. The rest of the conference and
reactions to speakers had more positive feelings and less animosity.
I do not have the facts or legal briefs to refer to any suits or threatened
suits but I must state that I do not find my role as operating PORE in this
light. The purpose and goals of PORE are to create a space for others to
share and exchange their ideas, research, and information for all to see.
It is up to them to do this as you have done and are doing here right now.
I support this but at PORE we have disclaimers of ours that are linked to
on all pages:
***
Disclaimers, Copyright and Trademark Statements
The various articles and artwork published on the Internet by PORE are
protected by the various trademarks and copyrights of the companies and
publishers contributing to these publications and it is unlawful to copy,
redistribute, and/or republish without the expressed prior written consent
of the owners and holders of the trademarks and copyrights. If it is in
text or in graphics by PORE alone it has a copyright owned by us. We at
Pore are willing to share most of our own published material. Please write
or email us for our permission.
PORE is not responsible for the accuracy or correctness of the content of
the material provided to PORE by third party contributors.
PORE provides Internet links to other remote sites and services. PORE
employees, consultants, and agents are not responsible for the content or
availability of these services.
PORE is not responsible for any activity that might be considered to be an
illegal and/or improper use of the Internet.
******************
>>>> I can appreciate you not wanting to get caught in the middle, jogg.
But the genie's out of the bottle. Kenn posted a couple of paragraphs of
Reich and this is the kind of thing Higgins sues over. It's insufferable.
It's like she can't tolerate any excitement or movement that she does not
control. From what you've relayed from the WRM, they are confirming
everything I said earlier. >>>>
>>Jogg wrote last time : "It is best to try to work in a positive
direction with them than in a negative one." >>
>>>>I'm positively enraged.
-Jim Martin>>>>>
Maybe I should try to reword that by saying: It is best to try to work in a
positive direction in Orgonomy than in a negative one. Note I have deleted
the part "with them" as that is up to the person or group that is question.
I didn't mean that as a directive and I am again reminded to recheck what I
write in the email by rereading and editing it to be sure I am expressing
myself in the true meaning of what I intended. I apologize to you Jim for
sounding like I was directing negative feelings to you. My intent was to
relay to OML the concerns people should be aware of in regards to copyright
laws. It is not for me to interpret how people use them.
Sincerely Jogg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PORE= Public Orgonomic Research Exchange
Web Page is at "http://www.mainelink.net/~pore/"
Email is at "pore@mainelink.net"
Slow mail: PORE/po box 1383/Windham,Me 04062-1383 US
//Question Authority...There Are No Experts\\ by W.Reich
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--- from list orgonomy@lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Many thanks for Geocities providing this free space
Get your own Free Home Page
bravenet.com