Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

Expand Messages
  • vruiz.jurado
    ... (Sorry I m quite new to the list and I want to reopen this thread but with a subject modification) To start, I totally agree with Jeff. If we want to
    Message 1 of 25 , Nov 6, 2008
      --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <shultonus@...> wrote:
      >
      > > Hi Iris and Ibo,
      > >
      > > What kind of copyright agreement do you have?
      > >
      > > You know that theft of intellectual property is no different from
      > stealing somebody's property.
      > >
      > > While the _restricted_ distribution of out of print texts free of
      > charge > may in some cases be viewed mildly. Selling somebody
      > else's (author, translator or publisher) property is straightforward
      > theft.
      > >
      > besides since Fukuoka is out of print, ......
      >
      > Wow, I'm shocked.
      >
      > Intellectual property theft is NOTHING like actual theft.
      > In fact what we view as intellectual property has been blown way out
      > of proportion to the original concept.
      > (see "FREE CULTURE" by Lawrence Lessig)
      >
      > The important part of any scientific community is the open exchange of
      > ideas and the ability of those ideas to be OPENLY tested.
      >
      > Originally the copyright was for 17 years.. because of RCA and Disney
      > corporations, art and science are being smothered to feed corporate
      > coffers.. the current copywrite extends for more than 100 years. this
      > is rediculous. THen we have estates getting involved and even further
      > in hibiting the transfer of these things.
      >
      > The world will never be changed by something that costs money.
      >
      > THis is my primary problem with keyline and permaculture...
      > What do you mean I can't USE a word. that's stupidity. language is
      > fundamental.
      >

      (Sorry I'm quite new to the list and I want to reopen this thread but
      with a subject modification)

      To start, I totally agree with Jeff.

      If we want to change the world we have to break these fictitious
      fences and frontiers.

      We need to say no to patents, say no to restrictive copyrights. Share
      your seeds and your knowledge with freedom. Use copyleft licenses
      instead in your publications. Say no to a closed/elitist permaculture.
      We need a free/open/libre permaculture and NF.

      Also, we have to let the people to do translations and derived works
      (with the same copyleft permissive licenses) using the Fukuoka books.
      We have to spread the Fukuoka words ...

      I like a lot this quote from Eben Moglen:
      "The great moral question of the twenty-first century is this: if all
      knowing, all culture, all art, all useful information can be
      costlessly given to everyone at the same price that it is given to
      anyone; if everyone can have everything, anywhere, all the time, why
      is it ever moral to exclude anyone?"

      Think about it.

      As an example, in my country I spend some years until I found a very
      poor copy of the One-Straw Revolution. Bad, too bad if we want to
      change something.

      Some links:
      http://freedomdefined.org/Definition
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Culture_movement
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft

      BR,

      Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado

      PS: Can someone add some more options to this poll:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fukuoka_farming/surveys?id=10897651
      like "Masanobu Fukuoka and his family with a copyleft license" or "A
      beneficiary named by Masanobu Fukuoka with a copyleft license".
    • laurie (Mother Mastiff)
      An individual DOES have the RIGHT and the FREEDOM to choose to offer his or her OWN intellectual property FREE to others. Share YOUR ideas and information.
      Message 2 of 25 , Nov 7, 2008
        An individual DOES have the RIGHT and the FREEDOM to choose to offer
        his or her OWN intellectual property FREE to others. Share YOUR ideas
        and information.

        What no individual DOES have a right to do is offer someone ELSE'S
        intellectual property except in modestly sized excerpts for purposes
        of education or criticism.

        Well introduced and well chosen excerpts are legal, and given the
        right audience, are enough to send genuinely interested people to find
        a full copy of the original.

        If you haven't developed or researched or at least personally
        re-created pertinent information yourself by actually TRYING the
        principles of no-till farming, then why are you participating here,
        offering someone else's thoughts as if those thoughts came from you?

        If you HAVE been trying these techniques, share your OWN experience
        and provide LINKS to the source documents that inspired you.

        Personal experience is what this list is all about - people sharing
        their hands-on experiences of trying to apply the PRINCIPLES of
        Fukuoka farming to very different soils, climates, and vegetation.

        If you have actually TRIED any of the principles, TELL us about YOUR
        experience. Tell us how it matched up with Fukuoka and how it
        differed, and if you know why, say why, or ask for suggestions.

        If you haven't gotten your hands dirty yet, why should anyone here
        have to waste their time on you?

        laurie (Mother Mastiff)
        Southeastern USA (NC and FL)



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado
        ... (Sorry for my English, maybe I m not explaining the point accurately) If people (like Fukuoka s book owners) want to use restrictive copyrights, they have
        Message 3 of 25 , Nov 7, 2008
          laurie (Mother Mastiff) escribió:
          >
          >
          > An individual DOES have the RIGHT and the FREEDOM to choose to offer
          > his or her OWN intellectual property FREE to others. Share YOUR ideas
          > and information.

          (Sorry for my English, maybe I'm not explaining the point accurately)

          If people (like Fukuoka's book owners) want to use restrictive
          copyrights, they have all the right to do that. Of course.

          From my point of view, it's totally contradictory with NF philosophy and
          our goals, but I'll respect this decision.

          I only want to explain why I think is better to our goals and to the
          planet to share our knowledge, and why I think to promote an artificial
          economy of shortage is wrong.

          I think that we have to create human commons like Wikipedia. If people
          want to create closed knowledge, it's ok, but I think that
          open/libre/free knowledge (about NF or other practical work) is better
          for humanity and for the planet.

          One more point about the word "free" in English: To share with freedom,
          is not the same to share free (with no cost). As a sample, see the last
          Radiohead LP:
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Rainbows


          BR,

          --
          Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado

          http://homes.ourproject.org/~vjrj/blog
          http://ourproject.org

          "What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us; what we have done
          for others and the world remains and is immortal." [Albert Pike]
        • Dieter Brand
          Vincente,   Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka’s books from Steve Solomon’s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?  Steve operates
          Message 4 of 25 , Nov 8, 2008
            Vincente,

            Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?� Steve operates his site like a virtual lending library, which means you get a personalized PDF file with your name on the understanding that you won�t redistribute it for commercial gain.� I don�t know if this is completely in accord with international copyright law, but so far there seem to be no objections.� I think this is a good way of making out of print books available to the public.

            Personally, I�m mainly interested in Natural Farming and I had hoped that this list would serve as a place to share and discuss our experience, but perhaps that hope was in vain.�

            To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular.� E.g., if a person, who never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has often been discussed but never been answered.� Somebody also needs to point out that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his work is neither legal nor moral.

            To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate our own ideology.

            We also need to maintain a minimum level of mutual respect and civility, which, in my opinion, includes introducing yourself to a group you join and letting the group know who you are, what you do and what interest you have in Natural Farming.� And if we do want to tell others about our ideas, I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.

            If you had been interested in a serious discussion (as you claim), you could have commented on my reply to Jeff, in which I explained the function and the benefits to society of intellectual property rights.� Since you did not, I have to assume that you are primarily interested in spreading an ideology and not in discussions.� Hence, there is no point in repeating my arguments.

            Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after), �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and humiliation.� They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and destroying the environment in a big way.

            If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land; it needs to be his property.� To rebuild soil that has been depleted by conventional farming can easily take 10 or 20 years of backbreaking labor.� No farmer is going to do that without a degree of assurance that he or she will be able to continue working on the land for the foreseeable future.� The nature romantics from the city who make a day excursion to the country, on the other hand, take it all for granted, mistake the cultured land created by generations of farmers for nature pure, like to trample down the wheat and start wild fires by throwing away cigarette buts or by crowning their Sunday afternoon excursion with a barbecue in the middle of a forest.� Then it�s back to the city and nobody cares about the damage that may have been done. Why should they?� It is not their own property.

            Intellectual property is no different from other forms of property.� At least in socialism there is the idea of taking away from those who have much to give to those who have little.� By abolishing intellectual property, on the other hand, we take away from those who have little, from all those creators who barely make a living by scrubbing other people�s floors.

            Lastly, already the Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler than �taking�.� Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it very far.� Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown levels.� And you say that is Natural Farming!?

            Dieter Brand
            Portugal





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • laurie (Mother Mastiff)
            I admire Radiohead for their grand experiment. The fact that it was a long awaited album helped them, also the fact that it was better than some of their
            Message 5 of 25 , Nov 8, 2008
              I admire Radiohead for their grand experiment. The fact that it was a
              long awaited album helped them, also the fact that it was better than
              some of their other offerings. I noticed that the reports of how much
              people paid and how many people paid varied widely.

              They offered material THEY owned, and let the people choose. Lovely
              if you can afford such a gesture.

              Most people won't pay any more than they must, to acquire anything
              they want or need.

              Did Fukuoka have family or heirs? He died very recently. Perhaps his
              estate is still being sorted out.

              It would make sense to identify and approach whoever inherited the
              rights to his books, and ask THEM about offering the books in
              electronic form, on the basis you admire. If they admired his values
              and share them, who knows, they might agree.

              If he had no heirs and left the rights to the publisher, I suspect you
              would have a more difficult time persuading them of the value of
              allowing buyers to choose the price.

              laurie (Mother Mastiff)
              Southeastern USA (NC and FL)



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • vruiz.jurado
              ... yes, but also the spending power of people in the world varies widely ;) ... More and more groups are using this model:
              Message 6 of 25 , Nov 8, 2008
                --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "laurie \(Mother Mastiff\)"
                <mother@...> wrote:
                >
                > I admire Radiohead for their grand experiment. The fact that it was a
                > long awaited album helped them, also the fact that it was better than
                > some of their other offerings. I noticed that the reports of how much
                > people paid and how many people paid varied widely.

                yes, but also the spending power of people in the world varies widely ;)

                > They offered material THEY owned, and let the people choose. Lovely
                > if you can afford such a gesture.

                More and more groups are using this model:
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamendo
                is a good form to skip intermediaries and to share their work widely.

                > Most people won't pay any more than they must, to acquire anything
                > they want or need.
                >
                > Did Fukuoka have family or heirs? He died very recently. Perhaps his
                > estate is still being sorted out.
                >
                > It would make sense to identify and approach whoever inherited the
                > rights to his books, and ask THEM about offering the books in
                > electronic form, on the basis you admire. If they admired his values
                > and share them, who knows, they might agree.
                >
                > If he had no heirs and left the rights to the publisher, I suspect you
                > would have a more difficult time persuading them of the value of
                > allowing buyers to choose the price.

                Thanks for the suggestions. This is a topic we have to think about it
                when publishing our works in other areas (different than music) like
                NF, Permaculture or ecology in general.

                Some samples: Graham Bumet has a book (the Permaculture a begginer's
                guide) with this kind of license:
                http://www.spiralseed.co.uk/
                Plants for a future website:
                http://www.pfaf.org/index.php
                and some publications like the Spanish "El Ecologista":
                http://www.ecologistasenaccion.org/spip.php?rubrique124
                also.

                We must spread widely our ideas and principles to fight against bad
                environmental practices.

                Off course you/they can publish your/their NF works with privative
                copyrights, but for me this means less people doing seed bombing :) a
                slower process and we don't have too much time.

                BR,


                Vicente
              • Jean Villafuerte
                Hooolooo everyone and greetings from Ormoc City, Philippines! I ve been reading threads on Fukuoka Farming and the debate on acquiring, distributing and
                Message 7 of 25 , Nov 8, 2008
                  Hooolooo everyone and greetings from Ormoc City, Philippines!

                  I've been reading threads on Fukuoka Farming and the debate on acquiring, distributing and reading the Fukuoka book on natural farming. Although I haven't read the book but the summary of his work in the fukuoka farming web site is enough for us to know what the fukuoka farming method is all about.

                  I believe Fukuoka was not alone in doing natural farming during his lifetime. Only the others did not write down their experiences. Fukuoka did and his supporters made it famous the world over.

                  However, anybody passionate on natural farming must not stop on the fukuoka method. While doing farming yourself, and researching in agriculture websites, you'll know what to do. A lot of our "giving" scientists publish their findings in their own websites. We get ideas from them too.

                  In our small "Ecology Farm" we get ideas from here and there and use our common sense in the application of such ideas. Since this farm is supposed to be a showcase for peasant filipino families, we try our very best to show them how to raise food for their tables and raise extra to sell for cash.

                  Actually, we started with green manuring, composting, then manufacturing the famous fermented juices. But, to understand farming is to understand ecology and Genesis where everything was created for a purpose. Pests are there to be the food for other insects, so why kill them when they have their own predators by nature?

                  There are websites that publish the kind of plants that are hosts to insects that eat other insects that have become pests to our favorite plants.
                  jean
                  www.ammado.com/pfi
                  www.ormocwomen.blogspot.com
                  www.evyouth.blogspot.com
                  www.tcfoc.blogspot.com
                  www.pfi.blogspot.com
                  www.geocities.com/pfft_2000

                  visit my blogs and leave your comments.





                  ________________________________
                  From: Dieter Brand <diebrand@...>
                  To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2008 11:01:24 PM
                  Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

                  Vincente,

                  Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org? Steve operates his site like a virtual lending library, which means you get a personalized PDF file with your name on the understanding that you won�t redistribute it for commercial gain. I don�t know if this is completely in accord with international copyright law, but so far there seem to be no objections. I think this is a good way of making out of print books available to the public.

                  Personally, I�m mainly interested in Natural Farming and I had hoped that this list would serve as a place to share and discuss our experience, but perhaps that hope was in vain.

                  To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his work is neither legal nor moral.

                  To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate our own ideology.

                  We also need to maintain a minimum level of mutual respect and civility, which, in my opinion, includes introducing yourself to a group you join and letting the group know who you are, what you do and what interest you have in Natural Farming. And if we do want to tell others about our ideas, I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.

                  If you had been interested in a serious discussion (as you claim), you could have commented on my reply to Jeff, in which I explained the function and the benefits to society of intellectual property rights. Since you did not, I have to assume that you are primarily interested in spreading an ideology and not in discussions. Hence, there is no point in repeating my arguments.

                  Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after), �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and destroying the environment in a big way.

                  If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land; it needs to be his property. To rebuild soil that has been depleted by conventional farming can easily take 10 or 20 years of backbreaking labor. No farmer is going to do that without a degree of assurance that he or she will be able to continue working on the land for the foreseeable future. The nature romantics from the city who make a day excursion to the country, on the other hand, take it all for granted, mistake the cultured land created by generations of farmers for nature pure, like to trample down the wheat and start wild fires by throwing away cigarette buts or by crowning their Sunday afternoon excursion with a barbecue in the middle of a forest. Then it�s back to the city and nobody cares about the damage that may have been done. Why should they? It is not their own property.

                  Intellectual property is no different from other forms of property. At least in socialism there is the idea of taking away from those who have much to give to those who have little. By abolishing intellectual property, on the other hand, we take away from those who have little, from all those creators who barely make a living by scrubbing other people�s floors.

                  Lastly, already the Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler than �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?

                  Dieter Brand
                  Portugal





                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                  ------------------------------------

                  Yahoo! Groups Links






                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • laurie (Mother Mastiff)
                  Dieter, What an eloquent post! My hat is off to you. You put the issue in a greater framework. I hope everyone got as much out of it as I did! Thank you so
                  Message 8 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
                    Dieter,

                    What an eloquent post! My hat is off to you. You put the issue in a
                    greater framework. I hope everyone got as much out of it as I did!
                    Thank you so much.

                    P.S., To the person who cited them as heroes of free intellectual
                    material, did you not read the entire article?

                    The Radiohead album was only "choose your price" for two months, then
                    it was marketed as a higher-than-average priced luxury set, and now at
                    a year old, it appears to be offered as an ordinary CD at the same
                    pricing as any other CD.

                    So the give-away was very short-lived and didn't preclude a hefty
                    profit for the group. Their give-away was more a clever marketing
                    gimmick than a true freebie.

                    If it were a true freebie, the album would ALWAYS be available at any
                    price the buyer wanted.

                    laurie (Mother Mastiff)
                    Southeastern USA (NC and FL)



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • ai3131
                    I have both copies on my flash drive, for my own personal use. Since these books are hard to find, having them available on the library at soilandhealth.org is
                    Message 9 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
                      I have both copies on my flash drive, for my own personal use. Since
                      these books are hard to find, having them available on the library at
                      soilandhealth.org is a great service to the public.

                      Not only that, but why even raise the copyright issue in the first
                      place? Of course I do believe in respecting copyright laws, but I do
                      not recall Fukuoka-sensei ever giving anyone exclusive rights over his
                      method to anyone. (He never said it was "his" method.) His vision was
                      that EVERYONE would practice natural farming. And since natural farming
                      is an ancient method that has been practiced throughout the ages and
                      the world in one way or another, stamping a copyright on it is not
                      feasible.

                      - Arian I.


                      --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, Anders Skarlind
                      <Anders.Skalman@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Two of Fukuoka's books, One Straw Revolution and The Natural Way of
                      > Farming can be downloaded from The Soil and Health Library, on the
                      > conditions that apply to this library. I e you will get, as a loan, a
                      > personalised copy. You will have to give your full name and email
                      > address. I recommend this service fully. Click on Agriculture
                      > Library, then on the book you want to loan, and follow instructions.
                      >
                      > http://www.soilandhealth.org/
                      >
                    • vruiz.jurado
                      ... Heroes? I was trying to explain the use of Free as in Freedom vs Free as in No Cost. Two more links. The staff of the oldest digital library:
                      Message 10 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
                        --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "laurie \(Mother Mastiff\)"
                        <mother@...> wrote:
                        > P.S., To the person who cited them as heroes of free intellectual
                        > material, did you not read the entire article?

                        Heroes? I was trying to explain the use of Free as in Freedom vs Free
                        as in No Cost.

                        Two more links. The staff of the oldest digital library:
                        http://www.gutenberg.org/
                        doing their explanation:
                        http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:No_Cost_or_Freedom%3F

                        Dieter, sorry, I wasn't defending soviets, freely taking or the
                        abolishing of property. Also I'm not searching for personalized copies
                        of books, but thanks for the link (that I read before in this thread).

                        And Jean, I agree with you when you talk about common sense use and to
                        understand nature.

                        BR,

                        Vicente
                      • Dieter Brand
                        Jean,   You are certainly right in that there are innumerable unsung heroes in the history of agriculture.   Would you be prepared to share the recipe for
                        Message 11 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                          Jean,

                          You are certainly right in that there are innumerable unsung heroes in the history of agriculture.

                          Would you be prepared to share the recipe for your fermented juices and how to apply them?

                          Here in Portugal, tilling and manure is the traditional way of farming, but most farmers use synthetic fertilizers nowadays.

                          In the beginning, I used some manure from a neighbouring cattle farmer, now I only use what grows on-site; mostly mulching and cover cropping and a bit of composting, but mostly in-place-composting.� Anyways, this is just on a small scale (the area I can irrigate during the summer).� To do farming on a larger scale, I would have to till, no-till is difficult in an arid region.� But lack of rain is not a problem you are likely to have in the Philippines.


                          Dieter Brand
                          Portugal



                          --- On Sun, 11/9/08, Jean Villafuerte <dayjean455@...> wrote:

                          From: Jean Villafuerte <dayjean455@...>
                          Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                          To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                          Date: Sunday, November 9, 2008, 3:45 AM

                          Hooolooo everyone and greetings from Ormoc City, Philippines!

                          I've been reading threads on Fukuoka Farming and the debate on acquiring,
                          distributing and reading the Fukuoka book on natural farming. Although I
                          haven't read the book but the summary of his work in the fukuoka farming web
                          site is enough for us to know what the fukuoka farming method is all about.

                          I believe Fukuoka was not alone in doing natural farming during his lifetime.
                          Only the others did not write down their experiences. Fukuoka did and his
                          supporters made it famous the world over.

                          However, anybody passionate on natural farming must not stop on the fukuoka
                          method. While doing farming yourself, and researching in agriculture websites,
                          you'll know what to do. A lot of our "giving" scientists publish
                          their findings in their own websites. We get ideas from them too.

                          In our small "Ecology Farm" we get ideas from here and there and use
                          our common sense in the application of such ideas. Since this farm is supposed
                          to be a showcase for peasant filipino families, we try our very best to show
                          them how to raise food for their tables and raise extra to sell for cash.

                          Actually, we started with green manuring, composting, then manufacturing the
                          famous fermented juices. But, to understand farming is to understand ecology
                          and Genesis where everything was created for a purpose. Pests are there to be
                          the food for other insects, so why kill them when they have their own predators
                          by nature?

                          There are websites that publish the kind of plants that are hosts to insects
                          that eat other insects that have become pests to our favorite plants.
                          jean
                          www.ammado.com/pfi
                          www.ormocwomen.blogspot.com
                          www.evyouth.blogspot.com
                          www.tcfoc.blogspot.com
                          www.pfi.blogspot.com
                          www.geocities.com/pfft_2000

                          visit my blogs and leave your comments.





                          ________________________________
                          From: Dieter Brand <diebrand@...>
                          To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2008 11:01:24 PM
                          Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

                          Vincente,

                          Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve
                          Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org? Steve operates his
                          site like a virtual lending library, which means you get a personalized PDF file
                          with your name on the understanding that you won�t redistribute it for
                          commercial gain. I don�t know if this is completely in accord with
                          international copyright law, but so far there seem to be no objections. I think
                          this is a good way of making out of print books available to the public.

                          Personally, I�m mainly interested in Natural Farming and I had hoped that
                          this list would serve as a place to share and discuss our experience, but
                          perhaps that hope was in vain.

                          To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth
                          as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who never
                          made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s
                          books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has
                          often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out
                          that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his
                          work is neither legal nor moral.

                          To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person
                          is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate
                          our own ideology.

                          We also need to maintain a minimum level of mutual respect and civility, which,
                          in my opinion, includes introducing yourself to a group you join and letting the
                          group know who you are, what you do and what interest you have in Natural
                          Farming. And if we do want to tell others about our ideas, I think it is
                          preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others
                          by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.

                          If you had been interested in a serious discussion (as you claim), you could
                          have commented on my reply to Jeff, in which I explained the function and the
                          benefits to society of intellectual property rights. Since you did not, I have
                          to assume that you are primarily interested in spreading an ideology and not in
                          discussions. Hence, there is no point in repeating my arguments.

                          Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after),
                          �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private property
                          known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of
                          millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and
                          humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of
                          penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and
                          destroying the environment in a big way.

                          If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming
                          you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land; it needs to be his property.
                          To rebuild soil that has been depleted by conventional farming can easily take
                          10 or 20 years of backbreaking labor. No farmer is going to do that without a
                          degree of assurance that he or she will be able to continue working on the land
                          for the foreseeable future. The nature romantics from the city who make a day
                          excursion to the country, on the other hand, take it all for granted, mistake
                          the cultured land created by generations of farmers for nature pure, like to
                          trample down the wheat and start wild fires by throwing away cigarette buts or
                          by crowning their Sunday afternoon excursion with a barbecue in the middle of a
                          forest. Then it�s back to the city and nobody cares about the damage that may
                          have been done. Why should they? It is not their own property.

                          Intellectual property is no different from other forms of property. At least
                          in socialism there is the idea of taking away from those who have much to give
                          to those who have little. By abolishing intellectual property, on the other
                          hand, we take away from those who have little, from all those creators who
                          barely make a living by scrubbing other people�s floors.

                          Lastly, already the Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler
                          than �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made
                          it very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                          others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown
                          levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?

                          Dieter Brand
                          Portugal





                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                          ------------------------------------

                          Yahoo! Groups Links






                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                          ------------------------------------

                          Yahoo! Groups Links








                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Dieter Brand
                          Laurie,   Thanks for your support.   Regarding the article you mentioned, I didn t read it at all, I only replied to Vincente s post.  I live in a remote
                          Message 12 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                            Laurie,

                            Thanks for your support.

                            Regarding the article you mentioned, I didn't read it at all, I only replied to Vincente's post.� I live in a remote region with much nature but without infrastructure and a very bad Internet connection, which doesn't allow me to follow-up most Internet links.� Also, with advancing age, eyesight and time become less, which makes us concentrate on what is important in life.

                            Regarding intellectual property rights, many people seem to be under the mistaken impression that it is to restrict information; in fact, the opposite is the case.� Put in a nutshell, a patent, for example, is a contract between an inventor and society, which guaranties the inventor the right to commercially use his invention for 20 years.� In exchange, the inventor has to make public his invention so that others can use it, not commercially, but to improve on the invention, for example.� Without such a contract, the inventor would be forced to hide the invention as long as possible to prevent the fruit of his labor being stolen by others.� In most countries, an invention is made public�18 months after the patent application and usually long before a patent is even granted.� Copyright works a little different, but the purpose is the same.

                            That, of course, doesn�t mean that there isn�t any abuse of the system, but abuse would be still worse without any rules.

                            Dieter Brand
                            Portugal



                            --- On Sun, 11/9/08, laurie (Mother Mastiff) <mother@...> wrote:

                            From: laurie (Mother Mastiff) <mother@...>
                            Subject: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                            To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                            Date: Sunday, November 9, 2008, 3:35 PM






                            Dieter,

                            What an eloquent post! My hat is off to you. You put the issue in a
                            greater framework. I hope everyone got as much out of it as I did!
                            Thank you so much.

                            P.S., To the person who cited them as heroes of free intellectual
                            material, did you not read the entire article?

                            The Radiohead album was only "choose your price" for two months, then
                            it was marketed as a higher-than- average priced luxury set, and now at
                            a year old, it appears to be offered as an ordinary CD at the same
                            pricing as any other CD.

                            So the give-away was very short-lived and didn't preclude a hefty
                            profit for the group. Their give-away was more a clever marketing
                            gimmick than a true freebie.

                            If it were a true freebie, the album would ALWAYS be available at any
                            price the buyer wanted.

                            laurie (Mother Mastiff)
                            Southeastern USA (NC and FL)


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


















                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Jean Villafuerte
                            Willingly, Dieter. I will soon publish them on my blog, the ormocwomen blog. But the original recipe is not ours, we got them from TACDRUP, I forgot the full
                            Message 13 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                              Willingly, Dieter. I will soon publish them on my blog, the ormocwomen blog. But the original recipe is not ours, we got them from TACDRUP, I forgot the full name but of course I will mention them in my blog. Sorry, I can't have it here now. I'm in a hurry.

                              jean
                              www.ammado.com/pfi
                              www.ormocwomen.blogspot.com
                              www.evyouth.blogspot.com
                              www.tcfoc.blogspot.com
                              www.pfi.blogspot.com
                              www.geocities.com/pfft_2000

                              visit my blogs and leave your comments.





                              ________________________________
                              From: Dieter Brand <diebrand@...>
                              To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 5:09:54 PM
                              Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

                              Jean,

                              You are certainly right in that there are innumerable unsung heroes in the history of agriculture.

                              Would you be prepared to share the recipe for your fermented juices and how to apply them?

                              Here in Portugal, tilling and manure is the traditional way of farming, but most farmers use synthetic fertilizers nowadays.

                              In the beginning, I used some manure from a neighbouring cattle farmer, now I only use what grows on-site; mostly mulching and cover cropping and a bit of composting, but mostly in-place-composting. Anyways, this is just on a small scale (the area I can irrigate during the summer). To do farming on a larger scale, I would have to till, no-till is difficult in an arid region. But lack of rain is not a problem you are likely to have in the Philippines.


                              Dieter Brand
                              Portugal



                              --- On Sun, 11/9/08, Jean Villafuerte <dayjean455@...> wrote:

                              From: Jean Villafuerte <dayjean455@...>
                              Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                              To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                              Date: Sunday, November 9, 2008, 3:45 AM

                              Hooolooo everyone and greetings from Ormoc City, Philippines!

                              I've been reading threads on Fukuoka Farming and the debate on acquiring,
                              distributing and reading the Fukuoka book on natural farming. Although I
                              haven't read the book but the summary of his work in the fukuoka farming web
                              site is enough for us to know what the fukuoka farming method is all about.

                              I believe Fukuoka was not alone in doing natural farming during his lifetime.
                              Only the others did not write down their experiences. Fukuoka did and his
                              supporters made it famous the world over.

                              However, anybody passionate on natural farming must not stop on the fukuoka
                              method. While doing farming yourself, and researching in agriculture websites,
                              you'll know what to do. A lot of our "giving" scientists publish
                              their findings in their own websites. We get ideas from them too.

                              In our small "Ecology Farm" we get ideas from here and there and use
                              our common sense in the application of such ideas. Since this farm is supposed
                              to be a showcase for peasant filipino families, we try our very best to show
                              them how to raise food for their tables and raise extra to sell for cash.

                              Actually, we started with green manuring, composting, then manufacturing the
                              famous fermented juices. But, to understand farming is to understand ecology
                              and Genesis where everything was created for a purpose. Pests are there to be
                              the food for other insects, so why kill them when they have their own predators
                              by nature?

                              There are websites that publish the kind of plants that are hosts to insects
                              that eat other insects that have become pests to our favorite plants.
                              jean
                              www.ammado.com/pfi
                              www.ormocwomen.blogspot.com
                              www.evyouth.blogspot.com
                              www.tcfoc.blogspot.com
                              www.pfi.blogspot.com
                              www.geocities.com/pfft_2000

                              visit my blogs and leave your comments.





                              ________________________________
                              From: Dieter Brand <diebrand@...>
                              To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2008 11:01:24 PM
                              Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

                              Vincente,

                              Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve
                              Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org? Steve operates his
                              site like a virtual lending library, which means you get a personalized PDF file
                              with your name on the understanding that you won�t redistribute it for
                              commercial gain. I don�t know if this is completely in accord with
                              international copyright law, but so far there seem to be no objections. I think
                              this is a good way of making out of print books available to the public.

                              Personally, I�m mainly interested in Natural Farming and I had hoped that
                              this list would serve as a place to share and discuss our experience, but
                              perhaps that hope was in vain.

                              To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth
                              as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who never
                              made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s
                              books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has
                              often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out
                              that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his
                              work is neither legal nor moral.

                              To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person
                              is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate
                              our own ideology.

                              We also need to maintain a minimum level of mutual respect and civility, which,
                              in my opinion, includes introducing yourself to a group you join and letting the
                              group know who you are, what you do and what interest you have in Natural
                              Farming. And if we do want to tell others about our ideas, I think it is
                              preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others
                              by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.

                              If you had been interested in a serious discussion (as you claim), you could
                              have commented on my reply to Jeff, in which I explained the function and the
                              benefits to society of intellectual property rights. Since you did not, I have
                              to assume that you are primarily interested in spreading an ideology and not in
                              discussions. Hence, there is no point in repeating my arguments.

                              Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after),
                              �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private property
                              known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of
                              millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and
                              humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of
                              penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and
                              destroying the environment in a big way.

                              If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming
                              you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land; it needs to be his property.
                              To rebuild soil that has been depleted by conventional farming can easily take
                              10 or 20 years of backbreaking labor. No farmer is going to do that without a
                              degree of assurance that he or she will be able to continue working on the land
                              for the foreseeable future. The nature romantics from the city who make a day
                              excursion to the country, on the other hand, take it all for granted, mistake
                              the cultured land created by generations of farmers for nature pure, like to
                              trample down the wheat and start wild fires by throwing away cigarette buts or
                              by crowning their Sunday afternoon excursion with a barbecue in the middle of a
                              forest. Then it�s back to the city and nobody cares about the damage that may
                              have been done. Why should they? It is not their own property.

                              Intellectual property is no different from other forms of property. At least
                              in socialism there is the idea of taking away from those who have much to give
                              to those who have little. By abolishing intellectual property, on the other
                              hand, we take away from those who have little, from all those creators who
                              barely make a living by scrubbing other people�s floors.

                              Lastly, already the Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler
                              than �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made
                              it very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                              others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown
                              levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?

                              Dieter Brand
                              Portugal





                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                              ------------------------------------

                              Yahoo! Groups Links






                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                              ------------------------------------

                              Yahoo! Groups Links








                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                              ------------------------------------

                              Yahoo! Groups Links






                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Steven McCollough
                              Dieter, I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted infrequently
                              Message 14 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                                Dieter,

                                I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the
                                past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted
                                infrequently because my contributions have been solely on my experiences
                                with natural farming which unfortunately are limited in extent and
                                successes. I must say though your attitude seems more on the order of
                                list proctor than participant. Also, please take advantage of quoting
                                certain sections of the previous posts you are referring to. It took me
                                nearly an hour to piece together who and what you were referring to even
                                given the subject line similarity.

                                Please see specific comments below.

                                Dieter Brand wrote:
                                > Vincente,
                                >
                                > Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka’s books from Steve Solomon’s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?
                                >
                                This is the best single answer to all the previous posts as it addresses
                                the property rights issue while still leaving those unable to purchase
                                books an avenue to get knowledge.

                                > To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka’s books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out that to use another person’s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his work is neither legal nor moral.
                                >
                                I agree with this totally.
                                >
                                > To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate our own ideology.
                                >
                                It seems to me over the years you have "used part of an argument as an
                                opportunity to propagate our own ideology," more than just about anyone
                                one the list. This is just so slippery a concept I don't know how you
                                can differentiate your views and posts from propagating an ideology.
                                Your views on dry land no till for example.

                                > I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others by the PC’s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.
                                >
                                I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Only by using the whole body of
                                discussion on an issue is the truth to be found. I find the arguments of
                                higher authority just as valuable as the personal experience of the
                                novice. Also, some on this list have more experience than others and
                                feel this is authority enough for their arguments even when in contrast
                                with a more prevalent view. I have a tremendous respect for your view,
                                for example, while always looking for a counterpoint.

                                > Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after), “real socialism”, the sole experiment of doing away with private property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and destroying the environment in a big way.
                                >
                                The fact that you felt it necessary to defend intellectual property
                                rights is a diversion of the list precepts in my view, as was your
                                defense of anti socialism that followed. I, for example, attribute a
                                different cause to squandering natural resources and destroying the
                                environment.
                                >
                                > If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming you know that a farmer needs to “own” his land;
                                >
                                I disagree with this also. While this is the paradigm we suffer with
                                now, it may be a root problem. You, for example, have let the financial
                                aspects of making a profitable farm operation affect all your views on
                                natural farming. Some, if not most, on this list are interested in
                                blending farming into life - not blend life into a farming.
                                > Bible mentioned something about “giving” being nobler than “taking”. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?
                                >
                                I must have missed where someone said freely taking what was made by
                                others was natural farming. Giving is making more headway than you seem
                                to give credit for. If we were to ask Fukuoka if his words should be
                                available to all, I think he would say yes. Should we condone copyright
                                infringement? No, that would be going too far. Should we encourage
                                reasonable laws concerning copyright as was the main argument of some
                                here? Yes.

                                This reply is offered in respect and to further the discussions on the
                                list. If, Dieter, you wish to win this as an argument, I'm sure you can
                                with elegance as demonstrated by past eloquence. I would hope instead
                                you see it as constructive review. Your "ideology" may not be visible to
                                you, but it is to me. I would like to see more discussion of natural
                                farming just as you suggested. Unfortunately this is not it whether as
                                initiator or responder.

                                Steven McCollough
                              • Dieter Brand
                                Steven,   Thanks for your comments and critique.    Whether or not to include quoted messages and how is a matter for debate.  I know one ML with a very
                                Message 15 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                                  Steven,

                                  Thanks for your comments and critique.�

                                  Whether or not to include quoted messages and how is a matter for debate.� I know one ML with a very high quality of discussion that strictly censors quoted text to the effect of cutting it to a bare minimum or excluding it altogether. �Personally, I don�t have any strong views on this.� And even though this list doesn�t seem to have any particular rules, I usually try to formulate my messages as well as possible so that others may read them with ease.� If I was a little careless in this one case, it may have been because I didn�t know if anyone would actually read it since I often don�t get a response to my arguments, or, if reaction there is, it goes off on a tangent.� In that respect your response is encouraging.

                                  Do I act like a �proctor�, or is my aim to win arguments?� Well, I will try to think about this.� But what do you mean by my �ideology�, or ideology of dry-land farming?� You really lost me there.� Living in a region where food crops have been grown for centuries by dry-land farming, I have attempted to adapt Natural Farming to this environment by field work for nearly five years.� I have also tried to research the question in the literature and on the net.� Among other things, I have described my work and the results on this and half a dozen other lists in the hope of generating a debate or of getting some new input.� Where in all of this do you see an ideology?

                                  You are of course right in that we all use �parts of other people�s� speech to present our own views.� To reply to every single statement would generate endless worms of messages that would be completely unreadable.� But I think there is a fundamental difference between picking out one argument of a message in the middle of a thread dating back several months to use it out of context for propagating a �general idea� of free sharing, or whatever, that may or may not be valid and without presenting any arguments (hence �ideology�), on one the hand, and a qualified reply that tries, however imperfectly, to take into consideration the �gist� of what another person is trying to say, on the other hand.� Hence, I do take issue, with your claim that I �try to propagate an ideology more than anyone else on this list�.� If you make such sweeping accusation, the very least you have to do is to give some specific examples.

                                  Steven, this is getting too long and I don�t have time to answer your other points at present.� But perhaps you have misunderstood what I said or misinterpreted my intention.� It may also be that I didn�t express my thoughts as effectively as I would have liked to, or that, being of different cultural background and experience, my way of expressing myself feels a bit alien to you.� Please don�t forget that different varieties of English, using different modes of expression, are spoken around the World.� Hence, we need to treat each other with a degree of tolerance.� If I did criticize some willful or arbitrary posts in the past, it is not because I enjoy criticizing others, but because, for much of the time, the level of debate on this list really is rock bottom (if you think this is only my view, you are wrong).

                                  To finish, just let me say a word about the �gist� of what I�m trying to say (the part you forgot to quote): �I�m mainly interested in Natural farming�, how (or if) it can be practiced in environments different from that in which it was conceived, �and a constructive discussion of the same�.� Natural Farming probably means something different to each one of us.� Personally, I�m not interested in Natural Farming as an ideology or in Fukuoka�s philosophy; even though I have translated some of it to offer it to the group as a basis for discussion (that never happened). �I do subscribe to a number of Japanese groups on Natural Farming and know that there are people who, ideology aside, do develop practical methods for growing food for subsistence or market farming and gardening by what can broadly be described as �natural� means.� In different climates, these methods are of limited use; hence, I had hoped that this list would
                                  serve as a platform to discuss such issues.� Unfortunately I feel, that in all the years I have been subscribed to this list, discussions have rarely gone to the core of the matter, and arguments, if there are, are all too often presented as items of believe that cannot be discussed.

                                  Dieter Brand
                                  Portugal

                                  PS:� I will be off the net for a couple of weeks for �technical� reasons.� But will be back soon for further discussions.

                                  --- On Mon, 11/10/08, Steven McCollough <steb@...> wrote:

                                  From: Steven McCollough <steb@...>
                                  Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                                  To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                                  Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 4:13 PM

                                  Dieter,

                                  I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the
                                  past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted
                                  infrequently because my contributions have been solely on my experiences
                                  with natural farming which unfortunately are limited in extent and
                                  successes. I must say though your attitude seems more on the order of
                                  list proctor than participant. Also, please take advantage of quoting
                                  certain sections of the previous posts you are referring to. It took me
                                  nearly an hour to piece together who and what you were referring to even
                                  given the subject line similarity.

                                  Please see specific comments below.

                                  Dieter Brand wrote:
                                  > Vincente,
                                  >
                                  > Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve
                                  Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?
                                  >
                                  This is the best single answer to all the previous posts as it addresses
                                  the property rights issue while still leaving those unable to purchase
                                  books an avenue to get knowledge.

                                  > To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the
                                  truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who
                                  never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s
                                  books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has
                                  often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out
                                  that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his
                                  work is neither legal nor moral.
                                  >
                                  I agree with this totally.
                                  >
                                  > To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other
                                  person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to
                                  propagate our own ideology.
                                  >
                                  It seems to me over the years you have "used part of an argument as an
                                  opportunity to propagate our own ideology," more than just about anyone
                                  one the list. This is just so slippery a concept I don't know how you
                                  can differentiate your views and posts from propagating an ideology.
                                  Your views on dry land no till for example.

                                  > I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the
                                  arguments of others by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.
                                  >
                                  I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Only by using the whole body of
                                  discussion on an issue is the truth to be found. I find the arguments of
                                  higher authority just as valuable as the personal experience of the
                                  novice. Also, some on this list have more experience than others and
                                  feel this is authority enough for their arguments even when in contrast
                                  with a more prevalent view. I have a tremendous respect for your view,
                                  for example, while always looking for a counterpoint.

                                  > Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are
                                  after), �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private
                                  property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens
                                  of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty
                                  and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high
                                  degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural
                                  resources and destroying the environment in a big way.
                                  >
                                  The fact that you felt it necessary to defend intellectual property
                                  rights is a diversion of the list precepts in my view, as was your
                                  defense of anti socialism that followed. I, for example, attribute a
                                  different cause to squandering natural resources and destroying the
                                  environment.
                                  >
                                  > If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural
                                  Farming you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land;
                                  >
                                  I disagree with this also. While this is the paradigm we suffer with
                                  now, it may be a root problem. You, for example, have let the financial
                                  aspects of making a profitable farm operation affect all your views on
                                  natural farming. Some, if not most, on this list are interested in
                                  blending farming into life - not blend life into a farming.
                                  > Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler than
                                  �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it
                                  very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                                  others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown
                                  levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?
                                  >
                                  I must have missed where someone said freely taking what was made by
                                  others was natural farming. Giving is making more headway than you seem
                                  to give credit for. If we were to ask Fukuoka if his words should be
                                  available to all, I think he would say yes. Should we condone copyright
                                  infringement? No, that would be going too far. Should we encourage
                                  reasonable laws concerning copyright as was the main argument of some
                                  here? Yes.

                                  This reply is offered in respect and to further the discussions on the
                                  list. If, Dieter, you wish to win this as an argument, I'm sure you can
                                  with elegance as demonstrated by past eloquence. I would hope instead
                                  you see it as constructive review. Your "ideology" may not be visible
                                  to
                                  you, but it is to me. I would like to see more discussion of natural
                                  farming just as you suggested. Unfortunately this is not it whether as
                                  initiator or responder.

                                  Steven McCollough

                                  ------------------------------------

                                  Yahoo! Groups Links








                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • Steven McCollough
                                  Dieter, Thank you for taking this in the context of improving the discussions on the list. ... I should have said, as much as anyone on the list. By ideology
                                  Message 16 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                                    Dieter,

                                    Thank you for taking this in the context of improving the discussions on
                                    the list.

                                    Dieter Brand wrote:
                                    > Steven,
                                    >
                                    > Thanks for your comments and critique.
                                    >
                                    > But what do you mean by my “ideology”
                                    > Hence, I do take issue, with your claim that I “try to propagate an ideology more than anyone else on this list”. If you make such sweeping accusation, the very least you have to do is to give some specific examples.
                                    >
                                    I should have said, "as much as anyone on the list." By ideology I mean
                                    those core values and impressions we have built up over the years that
                                    inform our perceptions of the world and natural farming in this case.
                                    From this one post I can point to (and did) the ideologies you are
                                    working under. A protective interest in defending personal property, a
                                    dislike of socialism, land ownership, etc.. These are not, you must
                                    admit, precepts of natural farming and are a distraction to the main
                                    topic. At the very least, they make the discussion expand to the extent
                                    we lose site of the original topic. Since your posts are also lengthy,
                                    these diversions are doubly deviating from the topic.
                                    > it is not because I enjoy criticizing others, but because, for much of the time, the level of debate on this list really is rock bottom (if you think this is only my view, you are wrong).
                                    >
                                    I can agree the discussions fall short of what they could be. Rock
                                    bottom and I would have left long ago. My point is this post of yours is
                                    no better in this respect. I believe we would have been better served if
                                    you would have pointed out the availability of the books on the Journey
                                    to Forever site, its implications for copyright issues and left it at
                                    that. On the other hand, your posts have more meat as a rule than the
                                    average so please don't leave.
                                    >
                                    > To finish, just let me say a word about the “gist” of what I’m trying to say (the part you forgot to quote)
                                    I didn't quote that because it was a sideline issue to your post. While
                                    probably the most important issue it was not your main point. From my
                                    earlier post: "I would like to see more discussion of natural farming
                                    just as you suggested."
                                    > : “I’m mainly interested in Natural farming”, how (or if) it can be practiced in environments different from that in which it was conceived, “and a constructive discussion of the same”. Natural Farming probably means something different to each one of us.
                                    This is a great summary of what we all want. Unfortunately, there is
                                    precious little I can add so I lurk most of the time.
                                    > I do subscribe to a number of Japanese groups on Natural Farming and know that there are people who, ideology aside, do develop practical methods for growing food for subsistence or market farming and gardening by what can broadly be described as “natural” means. In different climates, these methods are of limited use; hence, I had hoped that this list would
                                    > serve as a platform to discuss such issues.
                                    We need a person or persons that can bring this valuable information to
                                    our list, as I remember you have done on occasion.
                                    > Unfortunately I feel, that in all the years I have been subscribed to this list, discussions have rarely gone to the core of the matter, and arguments, if there are, are all too often presented as items of believe that cannot be discussed.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    I have noticed this also, it seems the natural farming concept on the
                                    list is suffering from the same problems of dogma you see in organic
                                    gardening circles. It has come to the point organic growers can't
                                    certify because of an entrenchment of the concepts, at least in America.
                                    You can't have organic chicken that is fed meat, for example, even if
                                    the feed is organic and meat is part of their natural diet. You have
                                    argued a need to till in semi arid farming and have taken flak for
                                    breaking Fukuoka's four principles, while receiving precious little help
                                    from the list on how you might have overlooked something. Best of luck
                                    in your natural farming and thank you for informative posts.

                                    With respect

                                    Steve McCollough
                                    > From: Steven McCollough
                                    > Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                                    > To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                                    > Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 4:13 PM
                                    >
                                    > Dieter,
                                    >
                                    > I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the
                                    > past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted
                                    > infrequently because my contributions have been solely on my experiences
                                    > with natural farming which unfortunately are limited in extent and
                                    > successes. I must say though your attitude seems more on the order of
                                    > list proctor than participant. Also, please take advantage of quoting
                                    > certain sections of the previous posts you are referring to. It took me
                                    > nearly an hour to piece together who and what you were referring to even
                                    > given the subject line similarity.
                                    >
                                    > Please see specific comments below.
                                    >
                                    > Dieter Brand wrote:
                                    >
                                    >> Vincente,
                                    >>
                                    >> Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka’s books from Steve
                                    >>
                                    > Solomon’s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >>
                                    > This is the best single answer to all the previous posts as it addresses
                                    > the property rights issue while still leaving those unable to purchase
                                    > books an avenue to get knowledge.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >> To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the
                                    >>
                                    > truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who
                                    > never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka’s
                                    > books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has
                                    > often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out
                                    > that to use another person’s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his
                                    > work is neither legal nor moral.
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >>
                                    > I agree with this totally.
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >> To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other
                                    >>
                                    > person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to
                                    > propagate our own ideology.
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >>
                                    > It seems to me over the years you have "used part of an argument as an
                                    > opportunity to propagate our own ideology," more than just about anyone
                                    > one the list. This is just so slippery a concept I don't know how you
                                    > can differentiate your views and posts from propagating an ideology.
                                    > Your views on dry land no till for example.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >> I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the
                                    >>
                                    > arguments of others by the PC’s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >>
                                    > I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Only by using the whole body of
                                    > discussion on an issue is the truth to be found. I find the arguments of
                                    > higher authority just as valuable as the personal experience of the
                                    > novice. Also, some on this list have more experience than others and
                                    > feel this is authority enough for their arguments even when in contrast
                                    > with a more prevalent view. I have a tremendous respect for your view,
                                    > for example, while always looking for a counterpoint.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >> Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are
                                    >>
                                    > after), “real socialism”, the sole experiment of doing away with private
                                    > property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens
                                    > of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty
                                    > and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high
                                    > degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural
                                    > resources and destroying the environment in a big way.
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >>
                                    > The fact that you felt it necessary to defend intellectual property
                                    > rights is a diversion of the list precepts in my view, as was your
                                    > defense of anti socialism that followed. I, for example, attribute a
                                    > different cause to squandering natural resources and destroying the
                                    > environment.
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >> If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural
                                    >>
                                    > Farming you know that a farmer needs to “own” his land;
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >>
                                    > I disagree with this also. While this is the paradigm we suffer with
                                    > now, it may be a root problem. You, for example, have let the financial
                                    > aspects of making a profitable farm operation affect all your views on
                                    > natural farming. Some, if not most, on this list are interested in
                                    > blending farming into life - not blend life into a farming.
                                    >
                                    >> Bible mentioned something about “giving” being nobler than
                                    >>
                                    > “taking”. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it
                                    > very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                                    > others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown
                                    > levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >>
                                    > I must have missed where someone said freely taking what was made by
                                    > others was natural farming. Giving is making more headway than you seem
                                    > to give credit for. If we were to ask Fukuoka if his words should be
                                    > available to all, I think he would say yes. Should we condone copyright
                                    > infringement? No, that would be going too far. Should we encourage
                                    > reasonable laws concerning copyright as was the main argument of some
                                    > here? Yes.
                                    >
                                    > This reply is offered in respect and to further the discussions on the
                                    > list. If, Dieter, you wish to win this as an argument, I'm sure you can
                                    > with elegance as demonstrated by past eloquence. I would hope instead
                                    > you see it as constructive review. Your "ideology" may not be visible
                                    > to
                                    > you, but it is to me. I would like to see more discussion of natural
                                    > farming just as you suggested. Unfortunately this is not it whether as
                                    > initiator or responder.
                                    >
                                    > Steven McCollough
                                    >
                                    > ------------------------------------
                                    >
                                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > ------------------------------------
                                    >
                                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > No virus found in this incoming message.
                                    > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                                    > Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.0/1779 - Release Date: 11/10/2008 7:53 AM
                                    >
                                    >
                                  • laurie (Mother Mastiff)
                                    Steven, It was my impression that both Dieter and I were objecting to someone coming to the group and posting nothing BUT other s information, including an
                                    Message 17 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                                      Steven,

                                      It was my impression that both Dieter and I were objecting to someone
                                      coming to the group and posting nothing BUT other's information,
                                      including an expressed desire to violate copyright laws.

                                      Let's talk about farming again, OK?

                                      laurie (Mother Mastiff)
                                      Southeastern USA (NC and FL)



                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado
                                      ... Copyleft is based on copyright law and is totally legal. Always is the decision of authors. If I share my works (something that I always do), I don t
                                      Message 18 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                                        laurie (Mother Mastiff) escribió:
                                        > including an expressed desire to violate copyright laws.

                                        Copyleft is based on copyright law and is totally legal. Always is the
                                        decision of authors. If I share my works (something that I always do), I
                                        don't violate nothing.

                                        Good collection of misunderstandings.

                                        > Let's talk about farming again, OK?

                                        yes, please.
                                        --
                                        Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado

                                        http://homes.ourproject.org/~vjrj/blog
                                        http://ourproject.org

                                        "Recently, someone asked me if I believed in astrology. He seemed
                                        somewhat puzzled when I explained that the reason I don't is that I'm a
                                        Gemini." [Raymond Smullyan]
                                      • Dieter Brand
                                        Steven,   What do you mean by ideology?  The occasional joke aside, I m prepared to defend every single word I said on this and any other list by argument,
                                        Message 19 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                                          Steven,

                                          What do you mean by ideology?� The occasional joke aside, I'm prepared to defend every single word I said on this and any other list by argument, and if you or anyone�can show�my arguments to be erroneous, I'm prepared to say thank you, I was wrong, I see what you mean.� Is that ideology?

                                          >�From this one post I can point to (and did) the ideologies you are
                                          > working under. A protective interest in defending personal property, a
                                          > dislike of socialism, land ownership, etc..

                                          These are your assumptions.� I'm not prepared to publish my personal curriculum vitae on the list (nobody should), but from the time I can remember, my heart has always beaten "on the left", and I don't mean "left" in the US sense of progressive democrat, but in the European sense.

                                          But I have never been prepared to confine my thinking to little boxes, and when I see somebody talking nonsense about the virtues of collective ownership and the like, I don't see why I should not call a spade a spade.

                                          >�These are not, you must�admit, precepts of natural farming and
                                          > are a distraction to the main�topic.

                                          Remember, the distraction was not from me, my initial argument went unanswered, and the post I replied to was dug out by someone with his own agenda months later.� You really try hard to find fault with me personally.� I think we should not discuss each other's personality in public on this list.� If there is something that bothers you, you are welcome to contact me off-list.

                                          > while receiving precious little help from the list on how you
                                          > might have overlooked something.

                                          Here we go again!� The assumption (or ideology) that a method has absolute validity, in any place and always, even if that has not been demonstrated and even though you haven't told us if you have ever carried out that method anywhere.�And if somebody reports facts that�do not match the theory, well then he�must have "overlooked" something and we must fiddle around with�the facts�until they�correspond to the theory.� I take my hat off to Fukuoka the _farmer_, who after 30 years of practice was able to say: "the proof is growing right in front of your eyes".� I don't have the same respect for people who, having read a book, claim that they know it all and that farmers who don't see it their way are really stup*d .� And please, don't start with talk about "methodless methods" or other such meaningless meaning as we have heard on this list before.

                                          Dieter Brand
                                          Portugal

                                          PS: I'm�still not�through with�the reflection you�have�told me to do.� But I may have a first hunch about��wanting to win an argument".��This is�really only a hunch, so don't take it too seriously: I think the competitive instinct is universal, we wouldn't be here otherwise.� Further, to present a clear well reasoned argument�is a bit like putting on a clean shirt and trousers to present a positive image in public so as to maintain our self-esteem and to show respect to others.� Nobody wants to be with a stinking old jerk.� I think a lot depends on what we try to do.�Do we try to help others, provide information, provide our ideas about how we see things and promote the discussion on Natural Farming?� Or do we only reply to criticize and find fault with somebody?� I think, with a few exceptions, there is a lot of goodwill and desire to help others on this list.�It is only the framework of discussions that makes things go awry at
                                          times.



                                          --- On Tue, 11/11/08, Steven McCollough <steb@...> wrote:

                                          From: Steven McCollough <steb@...>
                                          Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                                          To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                                          Date: Tuesday, November 11, 2008, 4:25 PM

                                          Dieter,

                                          Thank you for taking this in the context of improving the discussions on
                                          the list.

                                          Dieter Brand wrote:
                                          > Steven,
                                          >
                                          > Thanks for your comments and critique.
                                          >
                                          > But what do you mean by my �ideology�
                                          > Hence, I do take issue, with your claim that I �try to propagate an
                                          ideology more than anyone else on this list�. If you make such sweeping
                                          accusation, the very least you have to do is to give some specific examples.
                                          >
                                          I should have said, "as much as anyone on the list." By ideology I
                                          mean
                                          those core values and impressions we have built up over the years that
                                          inform our perceptions of the world and natural farming in this case.
                                          From this one post I can point to (and did) the ideologies you are
                                          working under. A protective interest in defending personal property, a
                                          dislike of socialism, land ownership, etc.. These are not, you must
                                          admit, precepts of natural farming and are a distraction to the main
                                          topic. At the very least, they make the discussion expand to the extent
                                          we lose site of the original topic. Since your posts are also lengthy,
                                          these diversions are doubly deviating from the topic.
                                          > it is not because I enjoy criticizing others, but because, for much of the
                                          time, the level of debate on this list really is rock bottom (if you think this
                                          is only my view, you are wrong).
                                          >
                                          I can agree the discussions fall short of what they could be. Rock
                                          bottom and I would have left long ago. My point is this post of yours is
                                          no better in this respect. I believe we would have been better served if
                                          you would have pointed out the availability of the books on the Journey
                                          to Forever site, its implications for copyright issues and left it at
                                          that. On the other hand, your posts have more meat as a rule than the
                                          average so please don't leave.
                                          >
                                          > To finish, just let me say a word about the �gist� of what I�m
                                          trying to say (the part you forgot to quote)
                                          I didn't quote that because it was a sideline issue to your post. While
                                          probably the most important issue it was not your main point. From my
                                          earlier post: "I would like to see more discussion of natural farming
                                          just as you suggested."
                                          > : �I�m mainly interested in Natural farming�, how (or if) it can be
                                          practiced in environments different from that in which it was conceived, �and
                                          a constructive discussion of the same�. Natural Farming probably means
                                          something different to each one of us.
                                          This is a great summary of what we all want. Unfortunately, there is
                                          precious little I can add so I lurk most of the time.
                                          > I do subscribe to a number of Japanese groups on Natural Farming and know
                                          that there are people who, ideology aside, do develop practical methods for
                                          growing food for subsistence or market farming and gardening by what can broadly
                                          be described as �natural� means. In different climates, these methods are
                                          of limited use; hence, I had hoped that this list would
                                          > serve as a platform to discuss such issues.
                                          We need a person or persons that can bring this valuable information to
                                          our list, as I remember you have done on occasion.
                                          > Unfortunately I feel, that in all the years I have been subscribed to this
                                          list, discussions have rarely gone to the core of the matter, and arguments, if
                                          there are, are all too often presented as items of believe that cannot be
                                          discussed.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          I have noticed this also, it seems the natural farming concept on the
                                          list is suffering from the same problems of dogma you see in organic
                                          gardening circles. It has come to the point organic growers can't
                                          certify because of an entrenchment of the concepts, at least in America.
                                          You can't have organic chicken that is fed meat, for example, even if
                                          the feed is organic and meat is part of their natural diet. You have
                                          argued a need to till in semi arid farming and have taken flak for
                                          breaking Fukuoka's four principles, while receiving precious little help
                                          from the list on how you might have overlooked something. Best of luck
                                          in your natural farming and thank you for informative posts.

                                          With respect

                                          Steve McCollough
                                          > From: Steven McCollough
                                          > Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                                          > To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                                          > Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 4:13 PM
                                          >
                                          > Dieter,
                                          >
                                          > I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the
                                          > past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted
                                          > infrequently because my contributions have been solely on my experiences
                                          > with natural farming which unfortunately are limited in extent and
                                          > successes. I must say though your attitude seems more on the order of
                                          > list proctor than participant. Also, please take advantage of quoting
                                          > certain sections of the previous posts you are referring to. It took me
                                          > nearly an hour to piece together who and what you were referring to even
                                          > given the subject line similarity.
                                          >
                                          > Please see specific comments below.
                                          >
                                          > Dieter Brand wrote:
                                          >
                                          >> Vincente,
                                          >>
                                          >> Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve
                                          >>
                                          > Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >>
                                          > This is the best single answer to all the previous posts as it addresses
                                          > the property rights issue while still leaving those unable to purchase
                                          > books an avenue to get knowledge.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >> To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell
                                          the
                                          >>
                                          > truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a
                                          person, who
                                          > never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell
                                          Fukuoka�s
                                          > books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which
                                          has
                                          > often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to
                                          point out
                                          > that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by
                                          selling his
                                          > work is neither legal nor moral.
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >>
                                          > I agree with this totally.
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >> To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the
                                          other
                                          >>
                                          > person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity
                                          to
                                          > propagate our own ideology.
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >>
                                          > It seems to me over the years you have "used part of an argument as
                                          an
                                          > opportunity to propagate our own ideology," more than just about
                                          anyone
                                          > one the list. This is just so slippery a concept I don't know how you
                                          > can differentiate your views and posts from propagating an ideology.
                                          > Your views on dry land no till for example.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >> I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with
                                          the
                                          >>
                                          > arguments of others by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet
                                          links.
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >>
                                          > I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Only by using the whole body of
                                          > discussion on an issue is the truth to be found. I find the arguments of
                                          > higher authority just as valuable as the personal experience of the
                                          > novice. Also, some on this list have more experience than others and
                                          > feel this is authority enough for their arguments even when in contrast
                                          > with a more prevalent view. I have a tremendous respect for your view,
                                          > for example, while always looking for a counterpoint.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >> Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are
                                          >>
                                          > after), �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with
                                          private
                                          > property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions
                                          after tens
                                          > of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme
                                          poverty
                                          > and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high
                                          > degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural
                                          > resources and destroying the environment in a big way.
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >>
                                          > The fact that you felt it necessary to defend intellectual property
                                          > rights is a diversion of the list precepts in my view, as was your
                                          > defense of anti socialism that followed. I, for example, attribute a
                                          > different cause to squandering natural resources and destroying the
                                          > environment.
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >> If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural
                                          >>
                                          > Farming you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land;
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >>
                                          > I disagree with this also. While this is the paradigm we suffer with
                                          > now, it may be a root problem. You, for example, have let the financial
                                          > aspects of making a profitable farm operation affect all your views on
                                          > natural farming. Some, if not most, on this list are interested in
                                          > blending farming into life - not blend life into a farming.
                                          >
                                          >> Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler than
                                          >>
                                          > �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made
                                          it
                                          > very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                                          > others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to
                                          unknown
                                          > levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?
                                          >
                                          >>
                                          >>
                                          > I must have missed where someone said freely taking what was made by
                                          > others was natural farming. Giving is making more headway than you seem
                                          > to give credit for. If we were to ask Fukuoka if his words should be
                                          > available to all, I think he would say yes. Should we condone copyright
                                          > infringement? No, that would be going too far. Should we encourage
                                          > reasonable laws concerning copyright as was the main argument of some
                                          > here? Yes.
                                          >
                                          > This reply is offered in respect and to further the discussions on the
                                          > list. If, Dieter, you wish to win this as an argument, I'm sure you
                                          can
                                          > with elegance as demonstrated by past eloquence. I would hope instead
                                          > you see it as constructive review. Your "ideology" may not be
                                          visible
                                          > to
                                          > you, but it is to me. I would like to see more discussion of natural
                                          > farming just as you suggested. Unfortunately this is not it whether as
                                          > initiator or responder.
                                          >
                                          > Steven McCollough
                                          >
                                          > ------------------------------------
                                          >
                                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > ------------------------------------
                                          >
                                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > No virus found in this incoming message.
                                          > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                                          > Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.0/1779 - Release Date: 11/10/2008
                                          7:53 AM
                                          >
                                          >

                                          ------------------------------------

                                          Yahoo! Groups Links








                                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.