Notifications
Clear all

Who owns the A.’.A.’. writings? - Rumour mill  

Page 1 / 3
  RSS

ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
30/08/2013 2:54 pm  

This must be deliberately leaked rumour, in order to undermine the O.T.O.
Really cant believe this as being fact, that a certain A.’.A.’. lineage, aligned to the O.T.O. is looking to legally take ownership of all the A.’.A.’. documents.
Surely the fact that the copyrights are almost, if not already expired?

I certainly hope this is not the case.

Taken from Satan in Berkeley's Facebook page.

BE PREPARED FOLKS, ONE BRANCH OF THE A.’.A.’. IS NOW TRYING TO CLAIM THAT ALL OF CROWLEY’S A.’.A.’. WRITINGS ARE ALSO PART OF HIS ESTATE AND OWNED BY OTO! ... Well, if that doesn’t prove megalomania, nothing does. Such logic has absolutely no interest in the spiritual growth of humanity but rather seems more concerned with padding someone’s pockets with thirty-pieces of silver in an attempt to ‘own’ Crowley on Malkuth. And they call themselves A.’.A.’.! Anyone who thinks these guys are not part of the Black Brotherhood needs to step back and read Crowley’s warning regarding this Order and remember, by their actions you shall know them. It would also be wise to read The Vision and the Voice, Liber XXX where we are informed if one is unworthy of Truth, having not conquered one’s ego, they can easily fall and become a Black Brother or what Blavatsky simply refers to as the “Brothers of the Shadow — the murderers of their Souls, the dread Dad-Dugpa clan.” The bottom line is that Breeze’s A.’.A.’., hiding behind the OTO, is trying to claim that all A.’.A.’. material actually belongs to Crowley’s estate. They are ignoring the fact that Crowley left his A.’.A.’. writings to humanity, copyright free and, if they are true A.’.A.’., they’d understand why. To argue otherwise only proves that they want to drag the Inner School down onto Malkuth which clearly exposes their underbelly as part of the Black Brotherhood.

They’re also citing the copyright clause because they know in a Court of Law there is absolutely no way that they can prove themselves legitimately A.’.A.’.. This new approach is simply another attempt to find a back door in which they believe they can use to eliminate what they assume to be their competition. How silly.

First, Crowley’s Last Will and Testament was proven invalid because he had filed bankruptcy years before he died and the Courts held his estate in escrow, therefore he couldn’t will what he didn’t own until he paid his debt. The OTO realized this ‘error’ and only recently paid Crowley’s debt and bought back the estate. Hence a problem. Long before the OTO actually ‘owned’ the estate many of Crowley’s copyrights had already expired and gone into Public Domain. So what did they buy? You should read the Court papers before simply believing what they’re telling you.

Second, and most important, if the OTO attempts to sue any A.’.A.’. lineage for copyright infringement they will have to prove in a Court of Law why they believe the lineage has no right to their own material which they’ve already used for almost a hundred years! Better yet, they’d be asked why a mundane Order like OTO actually thinks it owns an Inner School’s teachings? Isn’t this a contradiction in what the A.’.A.’. stands for? It is more like the behavior of the Black Brotherhood.

Then they’ll be asked why they believe they are the only true A.’.A.’.. What a can of worms that’ll open up.

On that note they’ll be asked in a Court of Law why they believe they have the right to disregard their withdrawing from and/or their expulsions from the A.’.A.’.? ... and they’ll be asked, what does this mean – “Listen, we pray you, with attention: for once only does the Great Order knock at any one door.” (Liber LXI Vel Causae)? ... Motta’s own writing in his Equinox will be cited as the source to his views on their credibility.

Second, it’ll be brought out in Court as to when they first mentioned in writing that ‘they’ were the true A.’.A.’. but in truth, it’s no secret that they didn’t come out of hiding until the early 1990s ‘after’ they were sure their master was dead. This way he couldn’t dispute their claims or their allegations about him. Then, and only then did they create this mythos that they had the right to over-throw Motta because he had gone mad. This argument will be fun to hear in a Court of Law where they can’t hide behind “We’re Hidden Masters’ and don’t have to disclose any facts about ourselves. In Court they’ll be required to disclose a paper trail pre-1990s of their existence as an ‘Order.’ Furthermore, if they are A.’.A.’., they will have no problem in a Court of Law producing their copy of Liber Collegii Sancti (Liber CLXXXV-185) disclosing not only when they took each degree, but which degrees they presently hold and when they took them.

But more important, in a Court of Law they will be asked, who were the highest ranking A.’.A. initiates in the United States during Motta’s supposed madness? It wasn’t Gunther, Wasserman or Breeze; one was a Philosophus, the other a Probationer and the last withdrew as a Student. In truth, and undisputed, Phyllyis Seckler and Grady McMurtry were both higher in rank than all of them, so even for the sake of an argument, if Motta did go mad, they’ll be asked in Court why they think ‘they’ assumed the mantle of running the entire Order and not Phyllis or Grady?

Now don’t get me wrong. We are not disputing the fact that they are the heads of their branch of the Order. But if Motta’s branch did go mad, what kind of fruit is his lineage producing? They need to reflect upon what it implies when fruit doesn’t fall far from the Tree.

In truth, Phyllis or Grady didn’t assume the mantle because of a simple fact. They believed, like Motta, that the Tree has many branches, each being independent of the other and each branch having its own teacher who didn’t interfere in the affairs of others. ... However, by Wasserman own admission he tried to convince both Motta and Grady McMurtry that there were no such thing as lineages or branches. Wasserman was upset that they ignore him. But he was only a Probationer, and they both were Magister Templi. It’ll be asked in a Court of Law why he thinks, a lowly Probationer, knows better than the Teachers! It’ll also be asked in Court why ‘they’ believe the Order had not splintered into many different points of view for the sake of humanity and what gives them the authority to say otherwise? Yes, it appears these guys have turned their backs on Freedom, and you’ll know them – “by this True Sign of their Initiation of iniquity, that that they resist Change, restrict and deny Love, fear Death.” (Liber Aleph, De Fratribus Nigris, Filiis Iniquitatis p. 104) In Magick Without Tears Crowley also writes that the “Black Brother constantly restricts himself; he is satisfied with a very limited ideal; he is afraid of losing his individuality.” In other words, they are incapable or realizing that the A.’.A.’. has grown and mutated into something far greater than themselves.

All in all, why can’t we all just get along? The world is big enough for all of us. I agree 100% with Grady; let the Gods decide the fate of all claimants. The false ones will drop by the wayside. But the aggressors on Malkuth should beware, ours is the law of the strong and one of the greatest lessons Grady imparted to his students is that we’re all soldiers in the army of Horus, defending our Rights of Freedom against the ways of the Black Brotherhood.

[Everyone has the right to quote from, or share and pass this posting along to others.]


Quote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
30/08/2013 4:14 pm  

Has anyone any evidence on what the "Works" in the copyright court case included, after paying AC's 3K debt?
According to the above, it is not every single piece of literature ever penned by AC. There must be some sort of listing from the court case??

Also is there a list anywhere of what has expired, what is about too and those that are still in copyright?


ReplyQuote
threefold31
(@threefold31)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 415
30/08/2013 4:19 pm  

Dwtw

I can't address the entire corpus of A.'.A.'. writings, but Copyright has expired for all works published in the United States before 1923. I believe this would include all the Holy Books of Thelema as published in the Equinox series. Someone please disabuse me of this notion if I am incorrect.

If one can find a definitive published statement where Crowley legitimately said that he desired A.'.A.'. works to be in the public domain, then they were never copyrighted in the first place, at least those prior to the date he would have said such a thing. It IS possible to publish a work and not claim copyright, whether accidentally (by neglecting to state 'x copyright 19--' or on purpose, using a statement such as Crowley is purported to have made.

Litluw
RLG


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
30/08/2013 4:27 pm  

LETTER QUOTED from Crowley to Tranker on Feb 20, 1925 e.v. Also on Satan in Berkerly's FB page.

ON A.’.A.’. COPYRIGHTS: Crowley wrote a 3 page letter to Tranker on Feb 20, 1925 e.v. In this he writes – “With regard to the A.’.A.’.. I must explain that the conditions are quite unique. There is no group working; the system is a chain system. There is no idea of property in the Order, so that the publications are given without question of copyright. It is therefore economically impractical to make any profit of them. Also, the system takes no account of persons; the greatest adept must pass through precisely the same routine as the beginner. It is not “attainment” which constitutes advancement in the A.’.A.’.,but the passing of a series of ordeals without the knowledge of the Aspirant. It may well be that the man with very great knowledge and power and even of advanced spiritual capacity should fail miserably where the simple-hearted passes scatheless.”

The page scan mentioned. The above was an alleged quote from it.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=295399023932479&set=a.173038489501867.40787.173026696169713&type=1&theater

So everything on this list before 1923 can be published by anyone, in the US... what about the UK? As most of AC's works where published there firstly.

http://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Works_of_Aleister_Crowley_publication_data


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
30/08/2013 4:47 pm  
"ptoner" wrote:
LETTER QUOTED from Crowley to Tranker on Feb 20, 1925 e.v. Also on Satan in Berkerly's FB page.

There is no idea of property in the Order, so that the publications are given without question of copyright. It is therefore economically impractical to make any profit of them.

That “to Me” appears to sum the whole matter up in a nutshell.

(That is my short response to this thread; I am not currently in a position to make a longer one, going into detail, etc., but I look forward to reading what others may have to say on the subject.  I will just add though, that if it had not been for Gerald Suster misguidedly doing what he thought was for the best at the time, the ‘Caliphornian’ OTO would not have had the specialist advice which enabled them to grab the bankruptcy copyrights back in 1991 for the princely sum of £1,500.  The karma from this subsequently moved Gerald forevermore afterwards to say that it had probably been the biggest mistake of his life.)

Norma N. Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
30/08/2013 10:47 pm  

And the effect of that - described above - has to be SEVERELY restrict the amount of published works by AC entering the book market. During the 80s and 90s there were plenty of quality items available, and now........VERY little. No new equinox for 20 years, just fussy and pedantic scholarship - that I can well do without - needlessly appended to a handful of items.

I feel a very large dis-service has been done to AC, the concept of Thelema and the works themselves.


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
31/08/2013 1:47 am  

I understand the argument that this has been bad for Crowley's works, what is the counter argument? I'm interested to understand how the Caliphate OTO would see this. There are always two sides to a story as they say. If someone could summarise what they think this argument would be I'd find that really helpful in coming to understand the situation better. In particular in terms of making Crowleys works available and accessible, how would the Caliphate OTO answer the charges being made here?

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4493
31/08/2013 2:27 am  

As far as I can tell, virtually all of the A.'.A.'. material is available online and for free. The same may be said for virtually all of the OTO material, up to and including Emblems and Mode of Use, the most secret document ever devised (more or less)  😮

It seems this thread, and its various comments, are about books ... not practices, not philosophy, not rituals, and not even secrets. So it (the copyrights) are a matter of concern for bibliophiles.

[/align:fr4kn303]

The average aspirant (whoever that might be  ::)) is not at any type of access disadantage.

Even if someone (or some org) were to obtain legal recognition of every last Crowley word, they would be hard pressed to stop this digital publication of everything.

We've seen this discussion/arguement before on these forums (pdf vs book), but the truth is that it's all available. The form/format is simply a matter of personal inclination.


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
31/08/2013 8:48 am  

Shiva, I think it's a concern to anyone with an interest in AC, not just bibliophiles, like you state. PS this is not an occult site, as gets mentions very often.

The truth is, it's available, I agree. Now long until a total crack down by the corporation? We are still awaiting all these promised volumes yet get watered down segments of the equinox for example. Diaries, confessions, won't materialise until all copyrights and court days have been for filled I think.

The Simon iff and drug and others stories being released in bargain books, only because the copyrights expired.

sent from my mobile.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
31/08/2013 11:18 am  

I understand the argument that this has been bad for Crowley's works, what is the counter argument?

Profit and ego.

As far as I can tell, virtually all of the A.'.A.'. material is available online and for free.

Available legally? And if they are available legally, what the problem then with producing books?

This is classic 'dog-in-the-manger' syndrome. They can't get themselves together to publish anything, and they won't allow anyone else to do so either.

And just in case if anyone is wondering, I don't recognise the (c)OTO in ANY capacity. In my view, a clique not worthy of the title they claim.


ReplyQuote
SatansAdvocaat
(@satansadvocaat)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 351
31/08/2013 12:03 pm  

Ah! that darkest and most passionately secret sin, I speak it with bated breath and whisper its secret longings as bibliophilia, as far as I'm aware its not an inditable historic offence as yet, but give the authorities time and they will probably get around to it.  If there is such a thing as survival after death, reincarnation, or the continuous continuity of existence (the most likely), I shall embrace the prospect of being a bookworm, munching my hungry way through ancient volumes of Levi, Crowley, Grant and all, satiated in cosmic fulfilment.  Burp! 


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
31/08/2013 5:47 pm  
"Satan'sAdvocaat" wrote:
Ah! that darkest and most passionately secret sin, I speak it with bated breath and whisper its secret longings as bibliophilia, as far as I'm aware its not an inditable historic offence as yet, but give the authorities time and they will probably get around to it.  If there is such a thing as survival after death, reincarnation, or the continuous continuity of existence (the most likely), I shall embrace the prospect of being a bookworm, munching my hungry way through ancient volumes of Levi, Crowley, Grant and all, satiated in cosmic fulfilment.  Burp! 

My name is Hamal and I am a bibliophile!

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
threefold31
(@threefold31)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 415
31/08/2013 6:03 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
As far as I can tell, virtually all of the A.'.A.'. material is available online and for free. The same may be said for virtually all of the OTO material, up to and including Emblems and Mode of Use, the most secret document ever devised (more or less)  😮

It seems this thread, and its various comments, are about books ... not practices, not philosophy, not rituals, and not even secrets. So it (the copyrights) are a matter of concern for bibliophiles.

Dwtw

Obviously you're correct that virtually all of this material is available online 'for free'. That cat was let out of the bag long ago. When you combine this with the possibility of fighting a legal battle against alleged copyright ownership, it doesn't seem that there is much economic incentive to try to publish actual books of Crowley material. On the OTO side, what they could offer is the 'value-added' aspect of some background scholarship, having access to lots of unpublished source material. And what little has been published by them in the recent past has lived up to that; whether readers are interested in that aspect or not is a different question.

The market for AC material is fairly small to begin with, and anyone with a serious interest can get most of the material online, so the incentive to publish mass market books hardly exists for a lot of the material. If in fact most of AC's work goes into public domain in the UK in 2018, it would open the field even more, but as far as large print runs or mass-market books, I can't imagine there will be too many. Although personally, I can't imagine wading through the Confessions in an online version. Give me a real book for large works like that.

Litlluw
RLG


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4493
31/08/2013 6:54 pm  
"ptoner" wrote:
Shiva, I think it's a concern to anyone with an interest in AC, not just bibliophiles, like you state.

I am an "anyone" who is so interested, but I am not concerned  :o. Such concern would lead to mental disturbances, which are counterproductive to states mentioned in Eight Lectures on Yoga and Book 4 - Part I.

Since I have (past) personal experiences that were in direct conflict with the current "legally-recognized" OTO in more than one area, I solved the (my) problem by selling all of my Crowley books and replacing them with freely-downloaded docs. I now have what appears to be a fully complete digital collection.

The history of OTO/AA/AC since 1985 (or so) has been overshadowed by the copyright situation. OTO (McMurtry lineage) won these copyrights in US federal court. Then they went and bought copyrights from The Queen. They have basically prevailed in all their legal battles. They are holding the high cards in this never-ending dispute. So why does a goodly-portion of "everyone" continue to struggle against the obvious? Who amongst them/us is going to prevail in a copyright war?

"ptoner" wrote:
PS this is not an occult site, as gets mentions very often.

I'm not sure what or why you are referring to this "occult" deal  ???  We are discussing AC copyrights.

"ptoner" wrote:
The truth is, it's available, I agree. Now long until a total crack down by the corporation?

Sorry I fail to comprehend. Do you mean, "Maybe it will not be long until a total crack down by the corporation?" ... or ... "Now how long until ..."

Haha 😀  There has been a crackdown (enforcement of copyright) by OTO for decades now. They will be unable to enforce a total crackdown. For example, many OTO docs are available online from Czechoslovakia; no "crackdown" there, obviously. What if I post material from my (theoretical - not actual) website in China? With 50% of the internet users dedicated to fleecing the other 50%, and with international government sponsorship of "hacking the enemy," how can one little org hope to stem the flow of data that they think they own? Our major governments are unable to stop the wild west nature of the www.

"ptoner" wrote:
We are still awaiting all these promised volumes yet get watered down segments of the equinox for example.

If the waiting is disturbing anyone's mind, let's remember that "they" can do whatever they want - unless someone wants to risk a lot of legal fees, and probably get defeated in court. "They" can say what they want and do what they "will."

"ptoner" wrote:
The Simon iff and drug and others stories being released in bargain books, only because the copyrights expired.

And it won't be too long until ALL the docs get positioned in the public domain. So it's not a matter of long-range future import. It's just the situation for now and for a few more years.

"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Available legally? And if they are available legally, what the problem then with producing books?

It appears that most (all?) of the Libers are available free online, and they are placed there by the so-called copyright holder. If so, then yes, this is legal. What is perhaps illegal is when someone downloads a copyrighted Liber and then posts it on their own website or publishes it as a book.

If any Liber or doc is clearly in the public domain, and thus "legal," there is absolutely no problem for anyone in reproducing it in any form.

"michaelclarke18" wrote:
They can't get themselves together to publish anything, and they won't allow anyone else to do so either.

Well, yes, this seems to be a fair analysis of the situation. I have no firm information, and this is not a "psychic" insight, but I suggest that they "can't get themselves together to publish anything" due to worker shortage and monetary restrictions. Of course, saying "they can't ... publish anything" is not correct. They have published a lot of stuff. A complete list was recently posted here on lashtal, and it was pretty long.


Now, as I understand it, this thread is based on a rumor/rumour that OTO is going to reach out and try to get ahold of the copyright to additional material (namely A.'.A.'. stuff) ... even though they appear to be making this "stuff" available for free online. We have no confirmation that they will be doing this. If so, then it seems like they will be attempting to wrap up all the OTO/AA/AC stuff under their ownership. Since it's all available for free online (legallly or illegally), then this would suggest a political motive, or a power-play. Hmmm 🙁  Yeah, that might be "ego." In some vague fashion, it migt even be "profit."

Everyone (every person and every org) who gets ahold of something (anything) usually will fight to keep that something, and usually will fight or struggle to add to that something.

I am not taking the side of pro-OTO in any of these matters, having my own viewpoint of discontent with what has happened.

I am not taking the side of anti-OTO in any of these matters, having recognized that they are holding the high cards.

I am simply poking fun at the amount of displeasure being expressed, whether it's the f/k controversy or the copyright scenario. What are you (any one of you) going to do about it ... other than whine and cry and call names?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4493
31/08/2013 6:56 pm  
"Hamal" wrote:
My name is Hamal and I am a bibliophile!

Well, then that's your problem isn't it?

Man has the right to be a bibliophile  😀


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
31/08/2013 7:04 pm  

When it all boils down.... You are right Shiva. Who cares... I have more important issues to deal with, ie me! 😉

sent from my mobile.


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
31/08/2013 7:04 pm  

I do agree with the idea that to get involved in the fight over copyrights is pointless. Crowley thought in Aeons, and I suppose it is really very little time to wait until the copyright expires on all his work. Meanwhile we have on-line sources and some material in books. Although I embrace technology I do enjoy holding a book in my hand, I guess if need be I can print my own books for my own use.

The knowledge and the work ARE more important that the binding, pretty as it may be! And surely the community as it is must be small enough, without division created by disputes. Maybe we should just focus on the Great Work and try not to raise any barriers between us!

😀
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
31/08/2013 7:51 pm  

If the waiting is disturbing anyone's mind, let's remember that "they" can do whatever they want - unless someone wants to risk a lot of legal fees, and probably get defeated in court. "They" can say what they want and do what they "will."

And oh, how very Thelemic of them...


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
31/08/2013 9:33 pm  

The OTO has been steadily publishing Crowley works for a while now. A few years ago, Joseph Thiebes compiled a timeline of publishing since 1995: http://thelema.thiebes.org/aleister-crowley-publishing-timeline/

And anyway, as has been pointed out, substantially all of the important material is available online for free, with in many cases the text-entry being attributed to upper-degree members of the OTO.

Since the material is all very readily available right now, I don't see what the big deal is about exercising just a tiny bit of patience and waiting for the OTO to produce quality editions. Seems like a waste of energy to complain about this, of all things.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
31/08/2013 9:52 pm  

Since the material is all very readily available right now, I don't see what the big deal is about exercising just a tiny bit of patience and waiting for the OTO to produce quality editions. Seems like a waste of energy to complain about this, of all things.

Um, 'tiny bit of patience'? How long have they been messing around with the diaries for? 3/4 years, is it more? But what exactly are we waiting for? What are they adding that is so great? It's AC that we are supposed to be interested in.

Moreover, I think it awful that we don't have the diversity of publications relating to AC, that we had in the 1970s. If the current situation had existed then, there would have been no KG edited and annotated Magick - that's for sure.


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
31/08/2013 10:19 pm  
"Los" wrote:
The OTO has been steadily publishing Crowley works for a while now. A few years ago, Joseph Thiebes compiled a timeline of publishing since 1995: http://thelema.thiebes.org/aleister-crowley-publishing-timeline/

And anyway, as has been pointed out, substantially all of the important material is available online for free, with in many cases the text-entry being attributed to upper-degree members of the OTO.

Since the material is all very readily available right now, I don't see what the big deal is about exercising just a tiny bit of patience and waiting for the OTO to produce quality editions. Seems like a waste of energy to complain about this, of all things.

Thanks for this information, very helpful.

Some interesting books in the upcoming list to look forward to!

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
01/09/2013 1:12 am  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Moreover, I think it awful that we don't have the diversity of publications relating to AC, that we had in the 1970s.

'Awful', Michael? Really?

I'm not sure how many AC works were published in the '70s - or, indeed, how 'diverse' they were - but Joseph's page lists '30 unique books in 17 years' since 1995, most with erudite, well-informed and, frankly, scholarly editorial material. Plus, of course, large numbers of books acknowledging Hymenaeus Beta's participation and generosity.

Not many obscure English mountaineer-poets have been so well served by their copyright owners, surely? 😉

These days, barely a week goes by without me adding another AC-related printed volume to my archive, though I note your oft-stated reticence to invest in such books elsewhere in these Forums.

As an aside, I should mention that I built much of my archive of AC-related books in the '70s and early '80s, mostly from the 'remainder' offerings in UK bookshop chains, which reveals much about the economic viability of publishing AC. The First Impressions series of AC first edition reprints published by Tony Naylor was certainly a joy, but they were presented with the approval and support of the copyright holder.

Now, time I got back to the books themselves to continue the Work...

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
01/09/2013 3:52 am  
"Shiva" wrote:
but I suggest that they "can't get themselves together to publish anything" due to worker shortage and monetary restrictions.

I'm skeptical about both of those reasons.  Surely, in as large an organization as O.T.O. Inc. is there's a handful that are willing and able to help out.  If after almost two decades at it, they haven't figured out how to have enough money to keep publishing Crowley's works, then someone is fucking up.  They are incorporated and tax-exempt, for Hidden Gods sake!  I mean, c'mon, how are they gonna own the copyrights, but not have enough money to actually publish the books?  If either of those reasons are actually true, then something in the Order is broken and needs immediate attention, to survive.  One would think that, if those reasons were true then members would be so embarrassed that they would all act to fix the situation or quit.

No, I can't help but think those in control of the Order would consider either of those things unacceptable, and wouldn't allow either of those things to be.  I think the reason is much more simple.  The O.H.O. / Editor will publish whatever he wants to publish whenever he wants to.    It's his publishing programme, and they own the copyrights.  People can bitch and moan all they want, but it isn't going to really make a difference.  So, why don't we all just wait, patiently, and talk about something else.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
01/09/2013 8:24 am  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Um, 'tiny bit of patience'? How long have they been messing around with the diaries for? 3/4 years, is it more?

Yeah, a tiny bit. Get some perspective: fantasy fans have been waiting since the 90s for George R.R. Martin to finish A Song of Ice and Fire (the book series that inspired the show Game of Thrones). If a bunch of fantasy lovers can wait twenty years, surely you can hang on for a fraction of that time, can't you? 

But what exactly are we waiting for? What are they adding that is so great?

Informative scholarly material. Maybe you think it's a drag and all, but some people actually care about professional, well-researched, well-footnoted texts that may lay the groundwork for serious scholarly examinations of Crowley as a cultural figure, literary figure, and unique manifestation of the ages in which he lived.

Moreover, I think it awful that we don't have the diversity of publications relating to AC, that we had in the 1970s.

Where did I put that world's smallest violin.....?


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
01/09/2013 9:31 am  
"Los" wrote:
The OTO has been steadily publishing Crowley works for a while now. A few years ago, Joseph Thiebes compiled a timeline of publishing since 1995: http://thelema.thiebes.org/aleister-crowley-publishing-timeline/

On average several books published each year. That's not bad is it?

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
01/09/2013 2:25 pm  

I'm always impressed when people are being poorly served and don't even suspect it - but at the same time are still grateful for the few crumbs which are flung their way. In my view that whole list - 'Aleister Crowley publishing timeline' - consists of nothing other than reprints, compilations of items already published and content that is ''circle of AC'' rather than from AC himself. There is very little that is new. Moreover the quality of some of the reprints is distinctly below average - Goetia for example.

I find their performance, as publisher, when one compares the COTO with other far more 'real' publishers like Scarlet Imprint, Three Hands Press and Xoanon, poor beyond belief. Especially when you consider that the latter are purely self-subsidized, without the benefit of royalties and COTO membership fees. Frankly, all the COTO is doing is knocking out reprints year after year of books over 75 years old....whilst some publishers - especially Scarlet Imprint is producing new and original works (which one can debate are probably far more relevant to our times) and at a similar rate. The same goes for THP and Xoanon, who produce books at a comparable rate - with the COTO - featuring new and entirely original work.

But, perhaps the 'new and original thinking' bit, is rather beyond some folks, who see occultism as a purely 20th century thing, and who can only take AC contained, annotated, dissected and served up like the framed and nicely packaged product they want to purchase. Dead in a tomb, a piece of history, a scholarly exercise and nothing more.

Personally, I would rather the COTO publish AC's diaries in the raw, and be allowed to do my own sifting - in the same manner as Jane Wolfe diaries - at least then, something would be published, at the moment there is nothing.

Informative scholarly material. Maybe you think it's a drag and all, but some people actually care about professional, well-researched, well-footnoted texts that may lay the groundwork for serious scholarly examinations of Crowley as a cultural figure, literary figure, and unique manifestation of the ages in which he lived.

TBH I can live without it, but would much rather see the works themselves as ORIGINALLY intended. Perhaps you need to be spoon fed, but some of us are happy to do out own thinking and draw our own conclusions. However, as someone whose sees AC as 'unique manifestation of the ages in which he lived' clearly Thelema, and related parts, aren't going to have much relevance for you - if you see AC as that i.e. AC locked within his time, and so therefore not especially relevant outside it.

Where did I put that world's smallest violin.....?

You're the one that is missing out - the fact is you are in ignorance and simply don't know any better.


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
01/09/2013 5:29 pm  

It's not necessary to disrespect the views of others in order to state different views yourself you know! What do you find below par about the publications coming out? is it the bindings? the editorial commentary?

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
01/09/2013 6:41 pm  

Perhaps it is more about money.  Before various pdf's and such like could be downloaded there was no choice but to buy the book.  Newly printed books cannot readily be downloaded, so at least initially if you want it you have to buy it.  Obviously it is wrong to illegally download stuff but you only have to look at the music industry to see the effect this has had.

Still if I am right, what a shame if it is just about money.


ReplyQuote
HG
 HG
(@hg)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 96
01/09/2013 8:25 pm  

There's a good article at Erwin Hessle's blog about this exactly same discussion, written in 2010(!):

http://www.erwinhessle.com/blog/?p=488


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
01/09/2013 8:59 pm  

Good link HG.

It seems to me there is much bad blood behind the arguments, for reasons that are beyond the scope of this thread, but I really don't see that this particular criticism of the Caliphate OTO stands up to much scrutiny. I remain opened minded, but that is my take on it currently.

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
01/09/2013 10:12 pm  

Feel somewhat bad in starting a thread, that brings out yet again, personal axe grinding.
It was a rumour that I reposted after all, the individual had his own reasons for publicly making that statement and in retrospect, I should not have posted it here.

I innocently thought that the AA documents where a separate entity from the O.T.O.'s collection of copyrights. It seems I was wrong.


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
01/09/2013 10:21 pm  
"Hamal" wrote:
Good link HG.

It seems to me there is much bad blood behind the arguments, for reasons that are beyond the scope of this thread, but I really don't see that this particular criticism of the Caliphate OTO stands up to much scrutiny. I remain opened minded, but that is my take on it currently.

93
Hamal

I'm not really interested in the OTO apart from as a publisher of books.  Whatever else they do is none of my business, some of the OTO membership I have met seem OK, so I have no especial gripe against this particular semi-secret religious organisation.

To clarify then:

Many books that have been around for some time can often be downloaded for free when the copyright owners are deserving of monies but receive none.  Newer books are harder to obtain electronically so at least publishers can make a little money to start with.  In as far as the late Mr Crowley's books were first published more then half a century ago publishers know that they can be obtained electronically which discourages hard-copy publication.  Aleister Crowley published some of his stuff at a loss.  If hypothetically an individual or group claim the Crowley 'legacy' or stewardship thereof, perhaps they should be less concerned about making money from Crowleys books and more with vigorously promoting this 'stewardship' (and copyright) they have claimed for themselves.  Perhaps it was worthwhile fighting in the courts for copyrights when money could be more readily made from publishing books.  In the current day now that it is a more marginal proposition there seems to be less enthusiasm.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
01/09/2013 10:46 pm  
"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
If hypothetically an individual or group claim the Crowley 'legacy' or stewardship thereof, perhaps they should be less concerned about making money from Crowleys books [...]

You do realize that the OTO makes substantially all of Crowley's important works freely available, right?

If they wanted to, they could have all of those works taken down from the internet and try to make money from selling the kinds of crappy editions that some people seem to want to flood the market. It sure doesn't seem like the OTO is solely interested in making money from publishing. It seems like they're interested in doing a quality job.


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
01/09/2013 10:59 pm  
"Los" wrote:
You do realize that the OTO makes substantially all of Crowley's important works freely available, right?

If they wanted to, they could have all of those works taken down from the internet and try to make money from selling the kinds of crappy editions that some people seem to want to flood the market. It sure doesn't seem like the OTO is solely interested in making money from publishing. It seems like they're interested in doing a quality job.

The vast quantity of pirated music and info that have been downloaded since the turn of the millennium (napster etc), the torrent sites of the current day.  Companies like EMI could not control this, the idea that a small quasi-religious organisation with limited finance could is absurd.  Therefore the OTO is unlikely to exert the control you suggest.  So therefore the possible attitudes or motivations you suggest derived from this do not necessarily follow.  As I have said the few OTO people I have encountered seem OK.  The problem for those that are looking to turn a profit from publishing books is that they are unfortunately often pirated.  This I suspect suppresses new hardcopies.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
01/09/2013 11:05 pm  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
But, perhaps the 'new and original thinking' bit, is rather beyond some folks, who see occultism as a purely 20th century thing, and who can only take AC contained, annotated, dissected and served up like the framed and nicely packaged product they want to purchase. Dead in a tomb, a piece of history, a scholarly exercise and nothing more.

I guess it depends on how people look at Crowley's work. Some people see it primarily as the jumping-off point for their fantasy lives (which, apparently, frequently involve tentacles, aliens, and fictional beings). If you're one of these people, then super. You can read all the Crowley you want online and then daydream away about monsters. Other people, however, understand that Crowley was a skilled and talented writer who had a lot of insights (very relevant to today's world), and they feel that his work deserves to be published as quality, scholarly editions -- in the same way that the works of other great writers are published. No one in his right mind would say that scholarly editions of, say, Keats' poems should be decried for "spoon feeding" readers: instead, people rightly praise such editions for providing vital contextual information and facilitating serious studies.

Frankly, I tend to think Crowley had more creativity in his little finger than all of these so-called "new and original thinkers" put together (most of whom seem to "think"/fantasize about the same boring "dark" stuff). Anybody can go into a trance and "channel" all sorts of inane nonsense, but it takes actual work -- years of it -- to do good research and scholarship. I applaud people for taking the necessary time to produce something that reflects the importance of Crowley's work.

However, as someone whose sees AC as 'unique manifestation of the ages in which he lived' clearly Thelema, and related parts, aren't going to have much relevance for you - if you see AC as that i.e. AC locked within his time, and so therefore not especially relevant outside it.

So are you saying that you think that, say, the people who produce scholarly editions of Keats' poetry think he has no relevance to the modern world?


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
01/09/2013 11:07 pm  
"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
If hypothetically an individual or group claim the Crowley 'legacy' or stewardship thereof, perhaps they should be less concerned about making money from Crowleys books and more with vigorously promoting this 'stewardship' (and copyright) they have claimed for themselves.

Isn't that what they are doing? I mean, I stand ready to be corrected, but as a money making exercise goes they don't seem that obsessed with making money out of Crowley's works. I can understand there is some bad blood about claims and legitimacy of authority, but that aside if the Caliphate OTO have some wicked plot I've yet to see it. And I'm quite sure there are jerks in many of these organisations along with genuine well meaning people. So unless someone can explain to me what bad things the they are doing I'll chalk the bad feelings up to old bad blood rather than some on-going evil plot.

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
01/09/2013 11:10 pm  
"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
The vast quantity of pirated music and info that have been downloaded since the turn of the millennium (napster etc), the torrent sites of the current day.  Companies like EMI could not control this

But music companies try to fight pirating -- they don't go out of their way to make the music available for free. The OTO, on the other hand, had its own members sit down and type Crowley's books into a computer so that they could be distributed online.

I really think the OTO's primary goal is getting Crowley's works out there and -- when publishing the works -- to be produce quality editions that will reflect how serious and important Crowley is.


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
01/09/2013 11:22 pm  
"Los" wrote:
The vast quantity of pirated music and info that have been downloaded since the turn of the millennium (napster etc), the torrent sites of the current day.  Companies like EMI could not control this, the idea that a small quasi-religious organisation with limited finance could is absurd. 

The Church of Scientology as I understand it seeks to exercise just that kind of control over works it claims ownership of. I don't want to go down this route, but I just wanted to point out how a religious group with good lawyers can wield a lot of control!

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4493
01/09/2013 11:39 pm  
"Hamal" wrote:
... I understand it seeks to exercise just that kind of control ...

Yes, that's probably true. It (and many other orgs) seek to control. The question is ... how effective are they?  Especially on the Internet?


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
02/09/2013 12:02 am  
"Shiva" wrote:
Yes, that's probably true. It (and many other orgs) seek to control. The question is ... how effective are they?  Especially on the Internet?

That is the wonderful thing about the internet, it's the most disruptive technology for dictatorial organisations or states, and long may it stay so. Unfortunately the internet gets less free by the day, this website in fact may soon be blocked by default from all UK broadband connections that don't seek to opt-out of filtering. After all, three thinking is dangerous you know Shiva!

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4493
02/09/2013 1:22 am  
"Hamal" wrote:
That is the wonderful thing about the internet, it's the most disruptive technology for dictatorial organisations or states ... After all, three  ??? thinking is dangerous you know Shiva!

Sorry, you lost me on that post.
Anyway, back to the subject ... Who owns the Libers?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
02/09/2013 3:27 am  

The announcer during the concert at Woodstock famously said, "It's a free concert from now on..."


ReplyQuote
newneubergOuch2
(@newneubergouch2)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 286
02/09/2013 6:56 am  

Richard Kaczynski just put up a large post related to the OP on the 'un'official OTO fb page.


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1088
02/09/2013 7:18 am  

For those few who are still Facebook Free - would some care to quote or summarize Richard's post?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
02/09/2013 7:48 am  

The three relevant parapgraphs are.

Kaczynski

Deleted by moderator - see full quote in my post below.

The implication for the purpose of this thread being that any statements by Crowley, prior to his last Will and Testament, regarding AA material could be considered defunct.  It should be said that Kaczynski does not mention AA material anywhere in his post though I would imagine they would come under the "whatever".


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
02/09/2013 9:10 am  

I certainly don't dispute the current COTO or OTO's claim that they are the current legal owner of AC's copyrights - this has been tested in various courts a number of times. Also, it's probably better that there is only one OTO, as opposed to many, but I am interested in the history.
So can anyone tell me the connection between the current OTO and the OTO of Karl Germer? As I understand it, there is very little. The claim of the current OTO seems to be based upon the purchase of the copyrights from the administrators in 1990 for around £1,500 - re: Jamie's comments about Gerald Suster.

He goes on to write that "I GIVE AND BEQUEATH my books and writings and literary effects so collected to my Literary Executors free of all death duties ON TRUST that they shall hand over same to the Grand Treasurer General of the Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Temple of the East) at 260 West 72nd Street New York City with a request that the collection shall be for the absolute use and benefit for the said Order and I DECLARE that the receipt of the Grand Treasurer General of the said Order shall be a sufficient discharge to my Executors.

Moreover, with regards to the above statement, was it legal of AC to do that? Seeing as he was a bankrupt, with anything of any value being the property of his creditors and/or the administrator of his affairs i.e. the same people from who the current OTO purchased the copyrights. Would be good to find out more about this.


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
02/09/2013 9:21 am  

Personally I do not care if it is 'right' for the Caliphate OTO to have the copy rights or not.  My question is: in as far as this particular group have in effect stewardship of Crowley's legacy (legally won copyright), are they fulfilling the role of promoting this legacy in an adequate manner.

My personal opinion is that when there was money to be made out of Crowley's books they did.  But in the current day, it is sometimes hard to even break even on publishing costs and because of this there is less enthusiasm to publish.  For me this begs the question is this organisation worthy to have the legacy.  In this context I am not considering the legal aspect, rather the well... occult aspect, are they adequately transmitting the current that they have so jealously guarded and claimed in the past?


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
02/09/2013 3:24 pm  

Reply # 13 from Shiva on: August 31, 2013, 06:54:12 pm:
“WE have no confirmation. Now, as I understand it, this thread is based on a rumor/rumour that OTO is going to reach out and try to get ahold of the copyright to additional material (namely A.'.A.'. stuff) ... even though they appear to be making this "stuff" available for free online.”

This is true.  Where is the actual confirmation?  Paul, as OP, has deferred further interest/ investigation.  Is it the case or not, someone?

Reply # 13 from Shiva on: August 31, 2013, 06:54:12 pm:
I am simply poking fun at the amount of displeasure being expressed, whether it's the f/k controversy or the copyright scenario. What are you (any one of you) going to do about it ... other than whine and cry and call names?

I, for one, have already made my intentions known.  Nor am I hiding my ‘identity’ behind an anonymous avatar.  But of that, more ‘anon’.

Reply #21 from Lashtal on: 01 September, 2013 at 01:12:13 am:
The First Impressions series of AC first edition reprints published by Tony Naylor was certainly a joy, but they were presented with the approval and support of the copyright holder.

Yes, some of them were a joy to see again in book for minded, Paul.  But who exactly was “the copyright holder” in that case?  My understanding was that throughout the 90s, Tony Naylor liaised closely with John Symonds, who assumed the role copyright holder in addition to being A.C.’s executor.  Are you referring to him or the [C].O.T.O?

Reply #34 from Los on: 01 September, 2013 at 11:05:00 pm:
I guess it depends on how people look at Crowley's work. Some people see it primarily as the jumping-off point for their fantasy lives (which, apparently, frequently involve tentacles, aliens, and fictional beings). If you're one of these people, then super. You can read all the Crowley you want online and then daydream away about monsters. … Frankly, I tend to think Crowley had more creativity in his little finger than all of these so-called "new and original thinkers" put together (most of whom seem to "think"/fantasize about the same boring "dark" stuff). Anybody can go into a trance and "channel" all sorts of inane nonsense, but it takes actual work -- years of it -- to do good research and scholarship. I applaud people for taking the necessary time to produce something that reflects the importance of Crowley's work.

Although I fundamentally disagree with you about the ‘worth’ of the [C].O.T.O. publishing programme, this is laugh-a-minute stuff here, Los!  Kudos to you, mon brave!

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
Personally I do not care if it is 'right' for the Caliphate OTO to have the copy rights or not.  My question is: in as far as this particular group have in effect stewardship of Crowley's legacy (legally won copyright), are they fulfilling the role of promoting this legacy in an adequate manner.

No, niet, and thrice again, nay.

Possibly someone can help me out with this issue relating to my second reply to Shiva, above.  The original intention with Francis King’s Second Edition of The Secret Rituals… was to try to publish all Crowley material pertaining to the O.T.O. or A.’.A.’. not already previously published or otherwise scarce, which bumps the proposed book out to about the size of Gems from the Equinox.  Naturally, I would like to try to ‘thin it out’, if possible, though not at the expense of essential materials.  Some of the below have been reprinted or are now fairly widely available, and so will be removed.  Can anyone suggest any other material(s) not included – and I would also like to know which, out of the following, is not already “in the public domain”, and, if so, who exactly would be “sitting on the copyrights’:
A.’.A.’. Diagnostics in the event of OTO Malfunction
VIII  8) Liber VIII (No Class named)
XI (11) Liber NU (Class D)
XIII (13) Gradum Monitis Abiegni (Class D)
XVII (17) IAO (Class D)

XXVIII(28) Septem Regem Sanctorum (Class D)
XXVIII(28) The Fountain Of Hyacinth/ Nike (No Class named – duplication?)
XLIX(49) Shih I Ch’ien (No Class named)
LXXIII(73) The Urn (No Class named)
XCIII(93) TzBA (No Class named)

C(100) The Unveiling Of The Sangraal (Class D)
CVI(106) Concerning Death (Class B)
CXXXII(132) Liber Apotheosis (No Class named)
CLXI(161) OTO Concerning The Law of Thelema (Class B)
CLXXXV(185) Liber Collegii Sancti (Class D)

CXCIV(194) OTO Intimation (No class named)
CDXIV(414) De Arte Magica Secundum Ritum Gradus Novæ O.T.O. Baphometi Epistola Anno Belli Universalis Ne Perdat Arcanum Scripta (Class B)
CDXV(415) The Paris Working (Class A and B)
DCLI(451) Liber Siloam, (Class D), Including “Eroto-Comatose Lucidity” (Class B)
CDLXVI(466) Artemis Iota (Class B)

DLV(555) Liber HAD (Class D?)
DCXXXIII(633) De Thaumaturgica (No Class named)
DCLXVI(666) The Beast (No Class named)
DCLXXI(671) Liber Pyramidos (Class D)
DCCCVIII(808) Liber Serpentis Nehushtan (No Class named)
DCCCXI(811) Collegi Interni (Class D)

Merci bien,
N. Joy

PS, Incidentally has anyone ever seen [C].O.T.O.'s "The Equinox" Volume III Numbers 7 and 8?  Otherwise, the two "Chinese Texts" of A.C. originally issued by Helen Pasons Smith in a (very) limited edition in 1971??  The only remotely comparable material here was in Marcelo Motta's own "The Equinox" Volume V No. 3 - now rigorously suppressed from republishing.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
02/09/2013 8:10 pm  
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
For those few who are still Facebook Free - would some care to quote or summarize Richard's post?

I have Richard's permission to post it in the Forums so will do so later.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
02/09/2013 8:26 pm  

The following is reproduced with permission from Dr Richard Kaczynski's Facebook post referred to above.

"Richard Kaczynski" wrote:
I am *so* tired of people asserting that "Aleister Crowley wanted his works to be free to everyone" or that "OTO should only own the rights to OTO-specific works" etc. I'm also tired of those who dismiss OTO's ownership of these copyrights by saying that they simply "bought" them from the UK official receiver, as if to imply they otherwise had no claim (which is false given prior legal precedents in OTO's favor).

Consider Crowley's last will and testament of June 1, 1947. He begins by saying "I HEREBY REVOKE all Wills and testamentory dispositions at any time heretofore made by me." Thus, this document explicitly supersedes anything that he may have said at any prior time.

He goes on to write that "I GIVE AND BEQUEATH my books and writings and literary effects so collected to my Literary Executors free of all death duties ON TRUST that they shall hand over same to the Grand Treasurer General of the Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Temple of the East) at 260 West 72nd Street New York City with a request that the collection shall be for the absolute use and benefit for the said Order and I DECLARE that the receipt of the Grand Treasurer General of the said Order shall be a sufficient discharge to my Executors. I BEQUEATH free of all death duties all the copyrights in my books and writings whatsoever and wheresoever including any copyrights over which at the date of my death I may have any power of disposition to the Ordo Templi Orientis aforesaid (other than those copyrights which shall already be the property of the Order) for the absolute use and benefit of the said Order."

This is crystal clear. Crowley was not referring to just his OTO writings, or just his poetry, or whatever. He left the whole shooting match to OTO. End of story.

It may be true that, as an undischarged bankrupt, Crowley technically lost the rights to his intellectual property. But this argument really misses the point: The fact of the matter is that settling Crowley's debt with the official receiver helped OTO to establish its UK rights to Crowley's works IN ACCORDANCE WITH HIS LAST WISHES. While "anyone" could theoretically have paid this debt, the fact that nobody had done so before OTO is as remarkable as the fact that the original MS to "The Book of the Law" found its way back into OTO's hands. (Makes you wonder if there isn't something to this "Secret Chiefs" stuff.) By whatever mechanism, in the end the rights to Crowley's literary works wound up in the very place that he intended.

Some will inevitably opine that the OTO is not the OTO. But look at the date of Crowley's will: June 1, 1947. What did the OTO look like at that time, six months before Crowley died? In the UK, there were no Lodges, just a handful of members who were so unorganized that when Crowley died no one was really sure who was in charge there. His Grand Treasurer General and designated successor was living in New Jersey. There was one active Lodge in the world working directly under Crowley's obedience: Agape Lodge in southern California. Its members included Grady McMurtry, Phyllis Seckler, Helen Parsons Smith, and the other IX*s who got together after Germer's death to re-start the Order. What other group of people could Crowley possibly have been referring to?

Since then, a lot of hard-working people have dedicated themselves to realizing Crowley's vision for OTO...whether it be nurturing the organization or ensuring that the provisions of Crowley's last will and testament were carried out. And who do you think originally put up all those free e-texts anyway? (People don't seem to appreciate that OTO had to work this out with its publishers, whose sales *were* affected by the availability of these e-texts.)

This doesn't mean you have to join, or even like, OTO. You can study and practice AC's works independently of OTO, much as I did for the decade from 1977-1987. But AC believed in OTO so much that he left everything to the organization. So don't carry on like OTO, in defending its copyrights, has villainously hijacked Crowley's work or are somehow undermining his desires. It strikes me as extremely ironic when self-identified Thelemites dispute what Crowley intended "in conformity with (his) Will"...double entendre intended.

I hope we can all agree that the author of the best AC biography deserves respectful responses. I will not hesitate to delete subsequent posts in this thread that fail to demonstrate this courtesy.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 3
Share: