Notifications
Clear all

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

Page 2 / 3
  RSS

Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
02/09/2013 9:46 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"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?

It's a typo, substituting one word for a similar but different word. I think you'll find the odd typo in AC's work, so I'm surprised you were unable to process it.

Dib.. Dib.. Dib...

::)
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
belmurru
(@belmurru)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1021
02/09/2013 9:51 pm  
"jamie barter" wrote:
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.

Volume III no. 8 is the Tao Te Ching, here:
http://www.amazon.com/Tao-Te-Ching-Liber-Equinox/dp/0877288461
ISBN 0877288461

(I have this one)

The Bibliography to this book lists the "I Ching", Volume III no. 7, as "in press", but I can't find that it ever appeared. Anybody know differently?


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
02/09/2013 10:08 pm  
"belmurru" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
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.

Volume III no. 8 is the Tao Te Ching, here:
http://www.amazon.com/Tao-Te-Ching-Liber-Equinox/dp/0877288461
ISBN 0877288461

(I have this one)

The Bibliography to this book lists the "I Ching", Volume III no. 7, as "in press", but I can't find that it ever appeared. Anybody know differently?

"jamie barter" wrote:
The only remotely comparable material here was in Marcelo Motta's own "The Equinox" Volume V No. 3 - now rigorously suppressed from republishing.

I have an edition of Motta's Equinox Vol. V, No. 3: The Chinese Texts of Magick and Mysticism.

Out of interest, what is your understanding of what was or should be in Equinox III No. 7?

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
OKontrair
(@okontrair)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 501
02/09/2013 10:13 pm  

Good old Dr.K - always cogent rarely wrong.

Bizarre list from Jamie Barter though. A mixture of available anywhere (e.g. stuff from the Equinox), pretty much irrelevant (e.g. Apotheosis but which anyway is published in The Unknown God by Martin Starr) and stuff probably no longer in existence (IAO, Beast, Serpentis etc.)

Strange to complain about the unavailable when unfamiliar with what is available. Good news for the forest though, cancel that new pulp mill.

OK


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
02/09/2013 11:06 pm  
"Hamal" wrote:
"Shiva" wrote:
"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?

It's a typo, substituting one word for a similar but different word. I think you'll find the odd typo in AC's work, so I'm surprised you were unable to process it.

No ... I get the three/free part. I was simply pointing out the slip. It's the first sentence that I don't understand. And I have never personally encountered any opposition to any "free thinking" that I might have generated. But look, it's really not applicable to this thread - so start another thread if the "dictatorial organisations" or "free thinking" is applicable to AC.


Richard Kaczynski's statement, posted above, is really clear. Any and all AC copyrights should now be held by OTO - If they conform to law.

But I wonder about the law(s). I know that in the USA, anything published in the USA before 1923 is considered to be in the public domain. For example, The Blue Equinox was published in 1919 in Chicago, so its contents are in the public domain in the USA.

But what of the original ten Equinoxes? I believe they were published in England. And a reference to UK Copyright Law says:

"6. Duration of copyright
The 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act states the duration of copyright as;

i. For literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works
70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies."

( ^ from http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p01_uk_copyright_law )

Hmmm :-  1947 + 70 = 2017.  Well, theoretically, it seems like OTO might actually be in a position to claim everything of AC's for the next four years, or so. Everything, that is, that was published in the UK.

The Equinox, vol I, is posted at: http://the-equinox.org/   ... and that site says:
"Copyright (c) O.T.O.,
O.T.O. INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
Ordo Templi Orientis
PO Box 33 20 12
D-14180 Berlin
GERMANY
"

and the following appears at that site:

"LIMITED LICENSE
Except for notations added to the history of modification, the text on this diskette down to the next row of asterisks must accompany all copies made of this file.
In particular, this paragraph and the copyright notice are not to be deleted or changed on any copies or print-outs of this file. With these provisos, anyone may copy these files for personal use or research. Copies may be made for others at reasonable cost of copying and mailing only, no additional charges may be added ...
"

Now I don't know who owns that site, but if it's OTO, then they seem to have already claimed the copyright and set forth certain (reasonable) conditions.


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
02/09/2013 11:21 pm  
"Richard Kaczynski" wrote:
........
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.

It is entirely legal that OTO has copyrights so I have removed that bit.

"......Since then, a lot of hard-working people have dedicated themselves to realizing Crowley's vision for OTO...."

Considering how marginal the OTO is compared to for example: Wicca, ISKON, Baha'i, Scientology etc etc.  Well...Perhaps they should work a little harder. I suspect 'Crowley's vision for OTO' might be somewhat different to what it currently is.  However I shall defer to Richard Kaczynski's scholarship on what this 'vision' actually was and whether or not OTO has realised it.

Whilst I am genuinely grateful that the e-texts are out there and thank the OTO for its efforts.  Could it be a pragmatic realisation that this material will be downloaded one way or another anyway?


ReplyQuote
threefold31
(@threefold31)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 429
03/09/2013 2:36 am  

Dwtw

To put Dr. Kaczynski's argument in a nutshell; Crowley wanted OTO to have his copyrights. He didn't legally have any to give to the Order at his death, but in the end they got them anyway, when no one else expressed an interest to do so. Therefore, justice has been served, so to speak. Now if only the eminent scholar would be upset enough about the fill/kill controversy to make a definitive statement about THAT. It would be interesting to hear his reasoning.

One thing glossed over in Dr. K's analysis is that possibly no one else bothered to buy the copyrights because it was not widely known that they were available. Another point is that while Crowley clearly willed all his copyrights to the OTO, these could have only included works which were copyrighted in the first place (regardless of whether he was a bankrupt or not, which is a separate issue). If Crowley had published A.'.A.'. material without a copyright notice, they would have been public domain already, and not covered by any Will and Testament made later. I don't know enough about the original publishing history of this material to say whether his statements about giving the A.'.A.'. stuff 'freely to the world' (paraphrase) was actually done or not - one would have to check the first editions of those works. If they have no copyright notice, then they're P.D.

Nevertheless, this thread has meandered a little from the OP about OTO 'claiming copyrights' in A.'.A.'. material, to more of a discussion about how well the OTO has done publishing works under those copyrights, which is a different issue altogether. It would seem that Crowley's copyrighted material, whether A.'.A.'. related or not, is still protected by UK copyright until 2018. At which time anyone who has a complaint about the job OTO has done in publishing these works will be free to publish the work themselves, and in the meantime they can publish the pre-1923 USA works at any time. Or they could just wait to see what gets released, and enjoy the readily available electronic versions for free, many of which were facilitated by the current copyright holders.

To me, it all seems like such a non-issue. OTO has the copyrights, so why is that such a big deal? They're taking too long to put out books? Ditto. Ask Dr. K how long it took to produce his very well researched biography. I can't imagine editing the Confessions could go much quicker, but then I'm not the one doing the work. Yes, we'd all like to have everything out in print and available in quality editions, but the economics are against it.  Like the old saying goes, if you want a job done you have three options: Cheap, Fast, and Good. Pick two, because you can't get all three.

Litlluw
RLG


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
03/09/2013 12:37 pm  
"Richard Kaczynski" wrote:
... 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. ...

Gerald Suster as an 'unthinking instrument' of the Secret Chiefs in getting [C].O.T.O. to buy the copyrights from the Queen!  Heaven, how he would have loved & laughed about that one!  (If possibly a little ruefully).  Bankruptcy law is a complicated mess; ‘fortunately’ Gerald had studied just this subject at Cambridge University and “advised” the ‘Calphornian’ leadership what to do in the early stages; spoon-fed them if you like; then it was up to the UK head with the occasional visit from Bill Breeze to seal the deal with Gersten & Nixon, London solicitors.  What more does you need to know?!

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?

A.C. placed stewardship in Karl Germer - or as he (Germer) himself referred to it, 'custodianship' - of both the O.T.O. and the A.’. A.’..  The fact that he made such a miserable job out of it is neither here or there; but so far as it goes, he appeared to have loathed McMurtry and the vast majority of Agape Lodge as a whole - describing them as ‘a spiritual desert’ out there in Caliphornia - and preferred Motta as the best of a bad bunch worldwide, which was probably why he had such difficulty in “passing the baton on”, as it were, despite the strictures of “fail not of an heir”.

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.)

Some people don’t seem to realise that this is their job – the whole point, in fact, of the O.T.O. vis-à-vis making the writings of the Prophet available for all.  What is it, do they want a medal for it??!  They should be grateful to be of service.  Like me, for instance.  (And none of my magickal writings are, or ever will be, "copyright" either, I'll have you know!  They're free!  Or as Hamal might say, "three"... ;))

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.

The whole thrust of Doctor Kazynski’s argument is that the C.O.T.O. is “the same” as the O.T.O. – a bit of a freshman’s mistake.  They are patently not the same at all.  And as I have previously remarked, it is even arguable whether Crowley’s “OTO” was “the real OTO” at all, in that no direct succession was ever authorised by his immediate predecessor Theodor Reuss, who was noticeably “going off” A.C. & Thelema at that point at the end…

"OKontrair" wrote:
Bizarre list from Jamie Barter though. A mixture of available anywhere (e.g. stuff from the Equinox), pretty much irrelevant (e.g. Apotheosis but which anyway is published in The Unknown God by Martin Starr) and stuff probably no longer in existence (IAO, Beast, Serpentis etc.)
Strange to complain about the unavailable when unfamiliar with what is available. Good news for the forest though, cancel that new pulp mill.

The list did not originate from me.  It came from Francis King, and therefore probably pre-dates the Nineties.  It obviously needs updating in a sense, although parts of it are still relevant.  (I also omitted Libri LI, Atlantis the Lost Continent, CXX Cadaveris, and, of course, IX[sup:28fjjpqu]o[/sup:28fjjpqu] Emblems & Modes of Use – which doesn’t have a number.)

"Shiva" wrote:
Hmmm :-  1947 + 70 = 2017.  Well, theoretically, it seems like OTO might actually be in a position to claim everything of AC's for the next four years, or so. Everything, that is, that was published in the UK.

Four years is not so long to wait.  I have waited sixteen already.  Tra-la-la!

"threefold31" wrote:
One thing glossed over in Dr. K's analysis is that possibly no one else bothered to buy the copyrights because it was not widely known that they were available.

See my comment above re Gerald Suster, Secwet Tweets and specialist knowledge, etc.

"threefold31" wrote:
To me, it all seems like such a non-issue. OTO has the copyrights, so why is that such a big deal? They're taking too long to put out books? Ditto. Ask Dr. K how long it took to produce his very well researched biography. I can't imagine editing the Confessions could go much quicker, but then I'm not the one doing the work. Yes, we'd all like to have everything out in print and available in quality editions, but the economics are against it. ...

This reminds me also of:

Reply #23 from Los on: September 01, 2013, 08:24:31 am:
Quote from: michaelclarke18 on August 31, 2013, 09:52:03 pm
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?

 
Incidentally, I just love that “a tiny bit” more there & “a fraction of that time” there, Los… I can remember this being promoted (along with their “proper, unexpurgated” version of Confessions) when I was still with them -- and that was over twenty years ago!!  How long does this stuff take, f'chrissakes?!  Not exactly ultra-efficient, are they - or even, just a tiny bit…

"belmurru" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
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./quote]
Volume III no. 8 is the Tao Te Ching [...](I have this one)
The Bibliography to this book lists the "I Ching", Volume III no. 7, as "in press", but I can't find that it ever appeared. Anybody know differently?

Yes, you are of course correct, Belmurru… I was mixing up (adding) the Tao-Te-Ching.  Not a bad version of that, either, credit to the [C].O.T.O. wherever it is due.  (Also, while I'm in a magnanimous mood, Bill Heidrick’s efforts with Thelema Lodge News & Calendar, etc., are usually excellent.)  But going back to the point, there is definitely no sign of the other one, Volume III Number 7, the Shih Yi, a ‘critical and mnemonic paraphraseof the Yi King by Ko Yuen’ [A.C.] which H.P. Smith issued under “Thelema Publications” and always goes for a tidy sum in retail.  As amazon learnedly puts it:

This is the only known printing of Aleister Crowley's Equinox Vol. III No. 7 "The Shih Yi: A Critical and Mnemonic paraphrase of the Yi King" by Ko Yeun (Aleister Crowley). Helen Parsons Smith caused this edition to be printed in 1971, it was a very limited edition. An exceedingly scarce title that begs for reprint, it is one of two "lost" volumes of the Equinox (the other being the Equinox Vol. III No. 2, either "The Greek Qaballa" or "The Gospel According to St. Bernard Shaw" depending on your bibliography sources). Most casual Crowley readers have never even heard of this book, let alone seen a copy.

Incidentally, can anyone explain the [C].O.T.O.’s bizarre numbering system, where they start off Volume 4 instead of alternating as per A.C. (and Motta) with Volume V.  Perhaps they wished to avoid confusion with the Master [of the A.’. A.’. !]’s own series!  But Marcelo got there first, as always, as he did with the Oriflamme too, and stole their thunder.  Jim Smith & Carol Lees got by the problem in the abased ‘80s by calling their effort “The New Equinox” – but this would then get confused with Ray Sherwin’s title of the same name.  Meanwhile, Ray Eales dispensed with Volume V altogether and jumped to Volume VII, but this consisted mainly of rehashed older material, nor has there been a second number.

Such inventiveness!
N. Joy


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
03/09/2013 1:54 pm  

To me, it all seems like such a non-issue. OTO has the copyrights, so why is that such a big deal?

It's a 'big deal' due to the large amount of very interesting material produced by AC which is now suppressed and no longer available. This might not be an issue if you have very deep pockets, but not all occultists are that wealthy. Moreover, there is rather more to the writings of AC that the usual books like: Diary of a Drug Fiend, Magick, Book of Thoth, Gems from the Equinox and one or two others offer. However, I recognize that for most people those texts will fully meet their needs...so for them, the books published by the COTO present no issues, as they may not wish to dig any deeper than what is available.

With regards to Richard Kaczynski's piece, I'm surprised that he seems so angry about it. For those of us that remember the times before the COTO took control of the copyrights, there were numerous AC and AC Thelema related works available on a frequent basis. There was the element of DISCOVERY of texts, but sadly not any more. In my view, the COTO came rather late to the party - around 1990'ish - and then took control. So the various freedoms enjoyed by publishers and AC enthusiasts were perhaps removed via fear of legalities, so they didn't want to take the risk.

Now, the important point here, is that previously to 1990 AC related books would appear on a regular basis and would largely be based upon the efforts of enthusiasts - regardless of whether they would make money or not. The fact was that the books would be AVAILABLE. 'IF' the COTO is publishing on the basis of commercial considerations and chooses not to publish and , then that is not really fulfilling the needs as intended by AC. By rights, the books should be published not for profit with the price actually subsidized - to ensure that the word of AC is spread....but does that ever happen?
I am asking the question because I don't know.


ReplyQuote
newneubergOuch2
(@newneubergouch2)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 287
03/09/2013 2:16 pm  

Michael ' which ones are suppressed and no longer available'?
Which books etc?


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1090
03/09/2013 2:26 pm  

just a reminder of what is currently made available online (if any poor soul happens to be reading this thread at some time in the distant future)

http://hermetic.com/crowley/


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
03/09/2013 3:10 pm  

Since a FaceBook post of mine was quoted above (with permission), I wanted to add a few quick comments:  My post was not a reply to this specific thread, nor was it written as "one for the ages."  It's a FaceBook rant, so I apologize for its...rantiness.  It *is* a response to the copyright question which comes up repeatedly, and it's one that I think is pretty clear given the facts.  So rantiness aside, I hope my comments add productively to the discussion, whether or not your reading of these facts agrees with mine.

OKontrair:  "Good old Dr.K - always cogent rarely wrong."  I couldn't ask for a better epitaph!  I just hope it still holds true when that time comes.  🙂

I agree with RLG that the question of copyrights is separate from that of book production...which departs from the original post.  And his example of "Like the old saying goes, if you want a job done you have three options: Cheap, Fast, and Good. Pick two, because you can't get all three" is very apropos.  Some people prefer cheap and fast, but, for better or worse, OTO is concerned about quality.  I'll leave it there, as I don't want to contribute to pulling this thread away from its OP.

Further to RLG's post:  Whether failure to place a copyright notice on a work means that the author abdicates all rights is one for a copyright lawyer.  Norms have changed over the years, and often those changes are retroactive to cover previously published works.  In the US, for instance, there was a time when one had to register a work with the Library of Congress for it to be considered copyright; currently, the law says that copyright exists in a work from the moment of its creation.  International copyright law is even more complex, as it varies so much from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.  For a great non-Crowley example, look at the legal history of Stravinsky's "Le Sacre du Printemps" (Rite of Spring).  Dating to 1913, it was therefor public domain in the US when Disney used it in "Fantasia."  However, because in the UK copyright extends for 70 years after the death of the creator, Disney ran into all kinds of problems when trying to distribute the film outside of the US.  There are now conventions in place where the US recognizes the UK's claims to copyright, so (if I understand correctly), that work is again considered protected in the US based not on US law, but on international law.  Again, I'm not a lawyer and I'm writing this from memory...but the gist is that these questions do not have simple answers.

[For another non-Crowley example, the estate of James Joyce would not allow Kate Bush to use a soliloquy from "Ulysses" as the lyrics for her song "The Sensual World"; years later, they granted this permission for her remix album.  One could also look at the Yeats estate, and the restrictions that it places on access and copies from its archives.  Or the Rolling Stones vs. The Verve.  These issues are far from unique to AC.]

With that said, Crowley seems to have been inconsistent with his use of copyright notice, sometimes saying "All rights reserved," sometimes saying "Copyright Aleister Crowley" and sometimes saying nothing at all.  I only have a smattering of pre-1923 first editions to check, but I'm skeptical that such notices even matter.  Again, it's one for the lawyers.

Michaelclarke18 writes "'IF' the COTO is publishing on the basis of commercial considerations and chooses not to publish and , then that is not really fulfilling the needs as intended by AC. By rights, the books should be published not for profit with the price actually subsidized - to ensure that the word of AC is spread..."  I simply refer back to AC's will, which clearly expresses his intentions to leave his literary effects "to the Ordo Templi Orientis aforesaid ... for the absolute use and benefit of the said Order."  I don't take "absolute use and benefit" to mean anything at all like "by rights, the books should be published not for profit with the price actually subsidized."  In fact, it sounds kind of like the opposite.  Nevertheless my understanding is that OTO spends far more in producing these works than it makes, so at the end of the day the reality isn't very far from what Michael describes.

Richard


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
03/09/2013 3:25 pm  

93!

"michaelclarke18" wrote:
It's a 'big deal' due to the large amount of very interesting material produced by AC which is now suppressed and no longer available.

If you are speaking of the diaries, the letters, the sketches and so on, it is doubtful that AC wanted them to be published at all. I for one am grateful that they will be published one day, but I think they must be scholarly edited/annotated/explained. That this takes more time than expected could be expected.

For example here in Germany they are working on a Complete Diaries, Letters and Works of Thomas Mann edition, which is expected to fill more than thirty volumes. The whole work is estimated to take decades. After now 5 or 8 volumes (I don't know the exact numbers) some 3000 letters have just been discovered in an archive and the whole work has to be stopped to catalogue and index these, maybe already existing volumes have to be expanded. Not to forget that the whole thing is government-sponsored.

Also it should not be forgotten that while AC stuff has been made available in the seventies or so, some of this stuff was not published as AC would have wanted it. Big parts of The Confessions have been abridged for example.

And while nearly all of the poetry has been published (by Gordon Press, by Mandrake, by First Impressions and so forth), I very much would like to see his poetry in editions comparable to the Teitan releases of The Golden Bough or Simon Iff or the recent The Drug edition: nicely edited, indexed and annotated.

Maybe the OTO should start a kickstarter fundraising thing for new publications. Although I think most of the delays are because of the time needed to edit them, and not because the money is so short.

Anyway, I think they are doing a very fine job...

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
03/09/2013 4:09 pm  

Just a quick note, if I may be indulged here: I seem to be in even more of a time-kink than usual, in that as a result of my being obliged to linger in the pre-moderation doghouse my posts may not appear in quite linear order.  Oh well, another exercise for the mind!  But perhaps the gentle reader will also bear this in mind, for so long as it lasts…

"rkaczynski" wrote:
For another non-Crowley example, the estate of James Joyce would not allow Kate Bush to use a soliloquy from "Ulysses" as the lyrics for her song "The Sensual World"; years later, they granted this permission for her remix album.  One could also look at the Yeats estate, and the restrictions that it places on access and copies from its archives.  Or the Rolling Stones vs. The Verve.  These issues are far from unique to AC.]

Off the top of my head, there was also the disagreement between David Bowie and the Orwell estate, who refused to let him do an “official” soundtrack for 1984 (- more fool them, on the evidence shown it would have been a blinder.)

"rkaczynski" wrote:
Michaelclarke18 writes "'IF' the COTO is publishing on the basis of commercial considerations and chooses not to publish and , then that is not really fulfilling the needs as intended by AC. By rights, the books should be published not for profit with the price actually subsidized - to ensure that the word of AC is spread..."  I simply refer back to AC's will, which clearly expresses his intentions to leave his literary effects "to the Ordo Templi Orientis aforesaid ... for the absolute use and benefit of the said Order."  I don't take "absolute use and benefit" to mean anything at all like "by rights, the books should be published not for profit with the price actually subsidized."  In fact, it sounds kind of like the opposite.  Nevertheless my understanding is that OTO spends far more in producing these works than it makes, so at the end of the day the reality isn't very far from what Michael describes.

A shame though that the wheels of progress grind exceeding slow.  With a worldwide membership of two to three thousand, all of whom these days must be keyboard-literate, there surely could not be any shortage of wo/man power to volunteer to type stuff up or even proof it though (But they don't want to use the plebs!)  Dues would also surely take care of the printing/ publishing costs – though if that’s not then enough, my suggestion to them would be to ease off on the legal fees.  And then, bob’s yer uncle!  (= A result.)

"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
For example here in Germany they are working on a Complete Diaries, Letters and Works of Thomas Mann edition, which is expected to fill more than thirty volumes. The whole work is estimated to take decades. After now 5 or 8 volumes (I don't know the exact numbers) some 3000 letters have just been discovered in an archive and the whole work has to be stopped to catalogue and index these, maybe already existing volumes have to be expanded.

I'm sorry, but I just find that screamingly hilarious!  Ain't that just life!

"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
And while nearly all of the poetry has been published (by Gordon Press, by Mandrake, by First Impressions and so forth), I very much would like to see his poetry in editions comparable to the Teitan releases of The Golden Bough or Simon Iff or the recent The Drug edition: nicely edited, indexed and annotated.

That would be a nice sight.  Some of the C.O.T.O.’s productions have been OK – some more than, some less.  But why shouldn’t other publishers be allowed a fair crack of the whip too?  If their goods turn out to be rubbish, no one will buy them anyway – & if COTO’s are the best, people will naturally buy them anyway – “success is your proof” and all that shazz, so what is the biggus dealus?

Love, Sex, Intelligence (– and Humour!) - The Shamen
N. Joy.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
03/09/2013 4:50 pm  

If you are speaking of the diaries, the letters, the sketches and so on, it is doubtful that AC wanted them to be published at all.

Do you have any evidence of that? If you have read "Progradior and the Beast" by Keith Richmond, you will see that Frank Bennett was asked by AC to remove details of some of the more *adventurous* happenings at the Abbey of Thelema from his magical diary, prior to typing up. This was so that when published, the diaries would not draw the usual hostility from the GB press. This request was made by AC, clearly with an eye to future publication. I expect this is also the case for his own diaries, as there are some key episodes missing. Also, most members of the abbey regularly typed up their own diaries for the same reasons.

, but I think they must be scholarly edited/annotated/explained. That this takes more time than expected could be expected.

As I previously said, I prefer to do my own sifting and would prefer to read the text 'in the raw' without being 'framed' with the thoughts of others. However, if you prefer to be spoon fed, then the approach of the OTO will be to your satisfaction.


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
03/09/2013 5:16 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
But I wonder about the law(s). I know that in the USA, anything published in the USA before 1923 is considered to be in the public domain. For example, The Blue Equinox was published in 1919 in Chicago, so its contents are in the public domain in the USA.

But what of the original ten Equinoxes? I believe they were published in England. And a reference to UK Copyright Law says:

I asked this, way back in post #4, also, Shiva.


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
03/09/2013 5:35 pm  

93!

Spoon-fed ... nice! Seems to apply to "I want them published because they are interesting" also, doesn't it?

Well, you don't have to read footnotes as you probably did when reading the Tunisian Diaries or the Magical Records that were already published, with footnotes thankfully.

Also, there are clearly BIG differences between Magical Records that indeed were intended to be published (as was done in the Equinox for example) and the private diaries of AC.

But everyone has his priorities, and for some this leads to frustration (or complaints), for others it doesn't.

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
Markus
(@markus)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 254
03/09/2013 6:41 pm  

What are the chances of the Equinox III:2 ever being published? As far as I know, it should be possible.

Markus


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
03/09/2013 6:44 pm  
"ptoner" wrote:
"Shiva" wrote:
But I wonder about the law(s). I know that in the USA, anything published in the USA before 1923 is considered to be in the public domain. For example, The Blue Equinox was published in 1919 in Chicago, so its contents are in the public domain in the USA.

But what of the original ten Equinoxes? I believe they were published in England. And a reference to UK Copyright Law says:

I asked this, way back in post #4, also, Shiva.

Anything published in the UK is subject to UK Copyright law, which is recognised internationally, and yes that means in the US too!

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
03/09/2013 6:47 pm  

Spoon-fed ... nice! Seems to apply to "I want them published because they are interesting" also, doesn't it?

I have my own reasons why I would want them published, not necessarily because I would find them 'interesting'.

Well, you don't have to read footnotes as you probably did when reading the Tunisian Diaries or the Magical Records that were already published, with footnotes thankfully.

I'm not sure whether those books really need the footnotes, knowing that AUD is Loveday - in the case of The Tunisian Diaries - doesn't really give any great insights. Moreover, the books you have outlined have footnotes by a number of different individuals - who are NOT going to be affiliated to a single organisation. Whenever you have an organisation, you will have an orthodoxy - not always the best way of getting at all the different shades of the truth.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
03/09/2013 7:35 pm  
"ptoner" wrote:
I asked this, way back in post #4, also, Shiva.

In the UK, copyright is for a fixed term of 70 years from the beginning of the year following the author's death, in this case therefore from 1/1/1948. Thus copyright protection continues until the beginning of 2018. The matter is further complicated by the copyrights on works published posthumously, which enjoy protection for a few years beyond 2018. The law here is obscure, is subject to change, and is best approached via expertise in intellectual property law.

These are the general principles of copyright law here in the UK. In practise it's a very complicated area, and anyone planning to publish anything by A.C. from 2018, on the assumption that the copyrights have expired, should take legal advice - unless, of course, they have a wallet more capacious than an elephant's scrotum.

In some countries such as the USA, works published prior to 1923 are out of copyright I believe, irrespective of when the author died. We have nothing like that in the UK.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
03/09/2013 8:00 pm  

The matter is further complicated by the copyrights on works published posthumously, which enjoy protection for a few years beyond 2018.

I was wondering whether that would include items, sort of, posthumously published like 'The Secret Rituals of the OTO'?

Well.....at least we now have access to the writings of A.E.Waite. copyrights expired this year 2013.


ReplyQuote
threefold31
(@threefold31)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 429
03/09/2013 8:16 pm  
"rkaczynski" wrote:
Further to RLG's post:  Whether failure to place a copyright notice on a work means that the author abdicates all rights is one for a copyright lawyer.  Norms have changed over the years, and often those changes are retroactive to cover previously published works.  In the US, for instance, there was a time when one had to register a work with the Library of Congress for it to be considered copyright; currently, the law says that copyright exists in a work from the moment of its creation. 

Dwtw

The law may well cover prior works retroactively, so as to make an initially uncopyrighted work now under copyright. I have no idea, and obviously do not pretend to be an IP lawyer. I suppose my main concern in bringing it up was speculating on whether AC ever actually published works with no copyright indicated deliberately, in accordance with his private statements that A.'.A.'. material was for the public, and not for profit. But AC's intentions, and the legalities, are two separate things. He intended the OTO to have his works. Well, if someone else had paid the official receiver for them, his intention would be negated. For better or worse, that did not happen. Likewise with his intention (at least at one time) that A.'.A.'. material be for the public. But in a few years it will virtually all be P.D. anyway. of course, that is no comfort to those clamoring for books now.

And in regards to the OP, I do think it's curious and unfortunate that the A.'.A.'. Holy Books of Thelema have been out of print for so long. It doesn't affect me, as I've had copies for 30 years, and can always get an electronic version, but for newcomers it's a sad situation if they want an actual printed book.

Litluw
RLG


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
03/09/2013 8:53 pm  
"threefold31" wrote:
Dwtw

The law may well cover prior works retroactively, so as to make an initially uncopyrighted work now under copyright. I have no idea, and obviously do not pretend to be an IP lawyer. I suppose my main concern in bringing it up was speculating on whether AC ever actually published works with no copyright indicated deliberately, in accordance with his private statements that A.'.A.'. material was for the public, and not for profit. But AC's intentions, and the legalities, are two separate things. He intended the OTO to have his works. Well, if someone else had paid the official receiver for them, his intention would be negated. For better or worse, that did not happen. Likewise with his intention (at least at one time) that A.'.A.'. material be for the public. But in a few years it will virtually all be P.D. anyway. of course, that is no comfort to those clamoring for books now.

And in regards to the OP, I do think it's curious and unfortunate that the A.'.A.'. Holy Books of Thelema have been out of print for so long. It doesn't affect me, as I've had copies for 30 years, and can always get an electronic version, but for newcomers it's a sad situation if they want an actual printed book.

Litluw
RLG

A few years ago a Thelemite here in Cardiff was witness in a fairly big court case.  When he was sworn in the Holy Books (as well as the bible) were used, I understand he supplied his own copy of the Holy Bools of Thelema for this purpose.  Now that the Holy Books have been out of print for a while this could cause potential problems.

It does surprise me that one of the Keystone texts of Thelema is so uncommon now.  How many Xtians would be without a bible, how many Muslims lack the Koran.  How many Jewish family's have a beautiful copy of the Torah in their home.  Yet in Thelema the Holy books are out of print because the OTO have copyright.

What possible reason could there be for 'bad blood' between the general corpus of Thelemites and the OTO?  Well I suppose you can always get an electronic copy and print it out at a repro shop (assuming copyrights are permitting).


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
03/09/2013 11:05 pm  

93

Yet in Thelema the Holy books are out of print because the OTO have copyright.

Are you sure this is the case?

Has anyone actually tried to publish Holy Books of Thelema and simply asked OTO out of courtesy if it's ok to do so? Because, you see, we may talk about a problem that actually doesn't exist...

93 93/93
Krzysztof


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
03/09/2013 11:23 pm  

If it is out of print and the concern is that there is not a high enough level of demand to make re-releasing it viable how about a licensed and authorised print on demand version? There are a plethora of print on demand publishers that can be used with zero up-front cost, each copy pays for itself, no doubt generating some revenue for the OTO. You can even pre-prescribe the weight/quality of paper and binding - paperback or hardback if the concern is quality (lulu.com for example).

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
03/09/2013 11:30 pm  

An excellent suggestion.  I was unaware that this was possible.  If it has not already been done perhaps it should be effected.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
04/09/2013 12:52 am  
"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
What possible reason could there be for 'bad blood' between the general corpus of Thelemites and the OTO?

If there is such a thing (this 'bad blood' thing you mention), it possibly could be attributed to "the haves and the have-nots."

In addition, there is the same 'bad blood' amongst most (if not all) of the religions you cited. Sunni vs shia. Protestants vs Catholics. Protestants vs those "other" protestants. Etc, etc. No identifiable group or caste or org gets through life on planet Earth without schisms, revolts, atrocities and war.

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
Well I suppose you can always get an electronic copy and print it out at a repro shop ...

These days, most people with a computer have their own printer.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
04/09/2013 1:25 am  
"Hamal" wrote:
... how about a licensed and authorised print on demand version?

There has been mention of "quality" in the products. Many bibliopublishophiles shreik and mumble when print-on-demand is mentioned. "The pages are glued, not sewn."  >:(


The pages are glued, not sewn![/align:2xevj0ad]

Now don't get me wrong here. My first book, a raging success by any commercial standard (it sold out in 6 months) was sewn in the old-school manner. But my succeeding five books were (and are still) produced by that modern print-on-demand wonder, both in hard cover and soft cover. You are correct in stating that there is no up-front cost. All one has to do is internetally submit a copy of the text and the cover.

Your suggestion is a good one, but it's possibly likely that the editors would rather swallow drain cleaner than submit to glued books.

[/align:2xevj0ad]
Personally, I have always liked the taste of drain cleaner, so I'm not so fussy about the lack of stitches.  😮


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
04/09/2013 9:13 am  
"Shiva" wrote:
"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
What possible reason could there be for 'bad blood' between the general corpus of Thelemites and the OTO?

If there is such a thing (this 'bad blood' thing you mention), it possibly could be attributed to "the haves and the have-nots."

In addition, there is the same 'bad blood' amongst most (if not all) of the religions you cited. Sunni vs shia. Protestants vs Catholics. Protestants vs those "other" protestants. Etc, etc. No identifiable group or caste or org gets through life on planet Earth without schisms, revolts, atrocities and war.

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
Well I suppose you can always get an electronic copy and print it out at a repro shop ...

These days, most people with a computer have their own printer.

With regard to these have and have-nots as I mentioned on another thread (OTO for proles); I suggested that the majority membership of the OTO in my geographical area at least are at the lower end of the socio-economic hierarchy.  So the only thing that is 'have' is OTO copyrights, these being controlled by the elite affluent few of the OTO.

Whilst even Buddhism (a more religious philosophy as is Thelema) has sectarian problems: Thelema does not really suffer from this to a noticeable extent because there aren't that many Thelemites to contend amoungst one-another.  If the Shia or Sunna Muslims try to blow each other up it would be newsworthy.  If Caliphate or Typhonian tried to blow each other up the news could well mistakenly report the attack was on another group because by chance more of these were present in the area.

Yes most people have their own printer, for a really nice copy of the Holy Books of Thelema perhaps a professional repro shop print run would be better (copyright permitting).


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
04/09/2013 11:33 am  

Firstly, an apology to Dr Kaczynski for the typo in missing the ‘c’ from his name in Reply #57; no disrespect intended.

"michaelclarke18" wrote:

The matter is further complicated by the copyrights on works published posthumously, which enjoy protection for a few years beyond 2018.

I was wondering whether that would include items, sort of, posthumously published like 'The Secret Rituals of the OTO'?
Well.....at least we now have access to the writings of A.E.Waite. copyrights expired this year 2013.

Of course, Secret Rits does not necessarily have to be printed & published in England.  (I was advised at the time by my late friend Chris Johnson that very competitive rates are available overseas, for instance…)

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
A few years ago a Thelemite here in Cardiff was witness in a fairly big court case.  When he was sworn in the Holy Books (as well as the bible) were used, I understand he supplied his own copy of the Holy Bools of Thelema for this purpose.  Now that the Holy Books have been out of print for a while this could cause potential problems.

It does surprise me that one of the Keystone texts of Thelema is so uncommon now.  How many Xtians would be without a bible, how many Muslims lack the Koran.  How many Jewish family's have a beautiful copy of the Torah in their home.  Yet in Thelema the Holy books are out of print because the OTO have copyright.

Yes, I quite agree Philip.  There is always “The Book of the Law” itself of course – Magickal Childe did a rather nice red faux-leather version at one time which would suit the porpoise – but isn’t that “copyright” the OTO, or at least “Crowley”, these days?

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
What possible reason could there be for 'bad blood' between the general corpus of Thelemites and the OTO?  Well I suppose you can always get an electronic copy and print it out at a repro shop (assuming copyrights are permitting).

Hard to tell whether you are being deliberately disingenuous, naive, or badly informed here, Philip.  But use your discrimination, old fellow!  The reasons should be shiningly obvious.  RESTRICTION is taking place, consciously and unconsciously – and not just any old restriction, Restriction upon the word of the Prophet by those enjoined to promulgate/ propogate his/ the Law, which by necessity includes his writings in their entireity, with no one person or body deciding on what's "appropriate" or not.  The time for that is past: let everyone make up their own minds, Thelemites aren't cattle! 

Muscle-arm intimidatory activity by legal ‘heavies’ for those who don’t toe the (in)corporate(d) line is a second reason.  The strong possibility of one-sided (or one person!) point of view in editorial/ scholastic annotations - there's an udder!  That's three fairly good "reasons" to be getting on with.

"Shiva" wrote:
If there is such a thing (this 'bad blood' thing you mention), it possibly could be attributed to "the haves and the have-nots."

In addition, there is the same 'bad blood' amongst most (if not all) of the religions you cited. Sunni vs shia. Protestants vs Catholics. Protestants vs those "other" protestants. Etc, etc. No identifiable group or caste or org gets through life on planet Earth without schisms, revolts, atrocities and war.

There is of course “As brothers fight ye”, Shiva – but I suspect Aiwass meant something other than “bad blood” ere!

"Shiva" wrote:

[/align:35mwhiu1]
Personally, I have always liked the taste of drain cleaner, so I'm not so fussy about the lack of stitches.  😮

Possibly you are using the wrong sort of drain cleaner.  If oral imbibition with a view to suicide is your intention, I understood from Kurt Vonnegut that “Drano” (see his Breakfast of Champions) was particularly fatal in that regard – maybe one man’s meat is another man’s strychnine though, as it were…?! ;D

Carry on carrying on -
N. Joy


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
04/09/2013 2:34 pm  

I have possibly gone by the time for ‘Edit’ to add this, but things are also complicated by being in the chronosynclastic limbo for the duration of pre-modulation (woof, woof! out here); however I wished to add the following for further elucidation to the above:

But now Midland City looked unfamiliar and frightening to Dwayne.  “Where am I?” he said.
He even forgot that his wife Celia had committed suicide, for instance, by eating Drāno – a mixture of sodium hydroxide and aluminium flakes, which was meant to clear drains.  Celia became a human volcano, since she was composed of the same sorts of substances which commonly clogged drains.

Chapter 6, Breakfast of Champions by Kurt Vonnegut[/align:19gp533j]

Oh, and incidentally –

Sacrifice cattle [money], little [usury] and big [capital] – after [in the name of] a [Crowned & Conquering; i.e., RHK] child.”  Liber AL, III.12

I humbly propose that this includes – although not specifically mentioned – copyrights.

“Goodbye Blue Monday” (– ‘Wide-Open BEAVERS Inside!’)
N. Joy!


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
04/09/2013 3:47 pm  
"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
... the only thing that is 'have' is OTO copyrights, these being controlled by the elite affluent few of the OTO.

Yes, that is what I was referring to (have the copyrights). I was not referring to (having) money. Most "whines" and "complaints" and "cries of dis-satisfaction" are about the copyrights, not the affluence of the members.

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
... Whilst even Buddhism (a more religious philosophy as is Thelema) has sectarian problems: Thelema does not really suffer from this to a noticeable extent because there aren't that many Thelemites to contend amoungst one-another.

It's not "how many" are against the others, it's simply the fact that contention exists. For example, how many threads on lashtal that refer to OTO (or even A.'.A.'.) end up being drawn out with multiple voices being raised against the lineage holders? Answer: Almost all of them, including this very one on which we are write-speaking. My point remains: It's part of general human nature to cry out against anyone or anything that is different or unique - especially if they "have" something that the others don't. They might "have" power or authority or money or copyrights or membership.

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
If Caliphate or Typhonian tried to blow each other up the news could well mistakenly report the attack was on another group because by chance more of these were present in the area.

So? We were talking about 'bad blood,' not about how the news groups make mistakes.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
04/09/2013 4:26 pm  
"belmurru" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
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.

Volume III no. 8 is the Tao Te Ching, here:
http://www.amazon.com/Tao-Te-Ching-Liber-Equinox/dp/0877288461
ISBN 0877288461

(I have this one)

The Bibliography to this book lists the "I Ching", Volume III no. 7, as "in press", but I can't find that it ever appeared. Anybody know differently?

I have the 1st paperback edition Tao Te Ching.  The description in that link is is not correct.  Mine is by "Askin" from the 1970's (it has an "Equinox Bookshop" sticker inside the front cover).  The edition in the link claims to be a 1st edition, but says published by Red Wheel/Weiser in 1995.  Thus this is, actually, the 2nd edition.

I know this is not very on topic, but I just thought I'd clear up what seems to be incorrect information.


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
04/09/2013 5:00 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
... the only thing that is 'have' is OTO copyrights, these being controlled by the elite affluent few of the OTO.

Yes, that is what I was referring to (have the copyrights). I was not referring to (having) money. Most "whines" and "complaints" and "cries of dis-satisfaction" are about the copyrights, not the affluence of the members.

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
... Whilst even Buddhism (a more religious philosophy as is Thelema) has sectarian problems: Thelema does not really suffer from this to a noticeable extent because there aren't that many Thelemites to contend amoungst one-another.

It's not "how many" are against the others, it's simply the fact that contention exists. For example, how many threads on lashtal that refer to OTO (or even A.'.A.'.) end up being drawn out with multiple voices being raised against the lineage holders? Answer: Almost all of them, including this very one on which we are write-speaking. My point remains: It's part of general human nature to cry out against anyone or anything that is different or unique - especially if they "have" something that the others don't. They might "have" power or authority or money or copyrights or membership.

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
If Caliphate or Typhonian tried to blow each other up the news could well mistakenly report the attack was on another group because by chance more of these were present in the area.

So? We were talking about 'bad blood,' not about how the news groups make mistakes.

A quick look on Amazon shows the Holy Books of Thelema New at £138.70 and 2nd hand at £47.00 (paperback)
Liber Al:  £5.99 paperback new (so fair enough)
The Bible:  £5.24 paperback new
The Koran:  £5.59 paperback new
The Torah: £10.34 paperback new

So you can try and label about 'whines' and 'complaints' as much as you wish Shiva.  In actual fact the copyright holders having in my view so vigorously fought for copyrights when there was money to be made from publication:  Now with electronic download they are dis-inclined to publish because of more marginal profitability which of course is perfectly reasonable for any purely commercial organisation.

I think that when the copyrights expire these books will become abundant again irrespective of the 'profit margin'.


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
04/09/2013 6:00 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
Your suggestion is a good one, but it's possibly likely that the editors would rather swallow drain cleaner than submit to glued books.

[/align:1b7fy1ux]
Personally, I have always liked the taste of drain cleaner, so I'm not so fussy about the lack of stitches.  😮

LOL. Did a little bit of searching and found at least the intimation that things have moved on with print on demand and other binding methods than glued are possible, for example:

"Digital printing is a relatively new technology, where books are printed instead of pressed. To realize the printing, only PDF files are used. Because this process does not need anything else, this method is considerably faster and cheaper. Digital printing can be done in black, colour or a combination of both. The colour pages can be placed randomly through the book. The digital process also has the advantage that smaller quantities can easily be printed (as is often the case with PhD theses) and you do not unnecessarily have to keep books in stock. The quality of digital printing has greatly improved in recent years, making the difference in quality between offset and digital printing now insignificant. [glow=red,2,300]Books are usually finished with a perfect binding (glued bound). Other bindings like stitched bound are also possible.[/glow]"

http://www.proefschriftmaken.nl/english/printing/

I would think it worthwhile making enquiries in the industry perhaps.

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
04/09/2013 6:07 pm  

I dunno though I hear an awful lot of whining going on! Have the people whining raised their concerns with the Caliphate OTO? If not... might be an idea seeing as they are in a better position to assist than we are!  ::)

😮
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
04/09/2013 6:20 pm  
"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
I think that when the copyrights expire these books will become abundant again irrespective of the 'profit margin'.

I think there is little doubt about that. Especially with the (gasp) print-on-demand, no-cost-up-front option.

The only problem is that many of the original works have been re-printed already (since AC's death), and when that happens different copyright rules come into effect. That is, the original copyright, set to expire in five years or so, may well be extended to a "more future" date. So anybody who takes the risk, even with print-on-demand or even photocopying, better be sure their project wasn't already re-printed and thus re-copyrighted.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
04/09/2013 6:40 pm  

Yes, that is what I was referring to (have the copyrights). I was not referring to (having) money. Most "whines" and "complaints" and "cries of dis-satisfaction" are about the copyrights....

Do you have a problem with that? You have made that point on a number of occasions.

I think that when the copyrights expire these books will become abundant again irrespective of the 'profit margin'.

I don't necessarily care about the copyrights, only that AC books become abundant again. I look forward to enthusiast 'deluxe' copies of the key texts, produced for love - rather than for pure profit.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
04/09/2013 6:52 pm  
"Hamal" wrote:
I would think it worthwhile making enquiries in the industry perhaps.

Yes ... but "worthwhile for who? Certainly not for me, who is completely (?) happy with my Lulu glue-bound books. Now I am only a tiny bit displeased with the "perfect-bound" technology in hardback, where the ends of those front and back grooves next to the spine seem to be a bit irregular. But the soft covers are just like any professional publication on the market.

Maybe it would be "worthwhile" for you, if you're planning on doing some publishing.

Whether or not it would be "worthwhile" for the AC copyright holders is actually a matter to be decided by them/he/it (ie, the OTO).

Anyway, this thread is about who owns the copyrights, not about how they or anyone else can actually publish them, using whatever technology they choose. As far as I can tell, the AC copyrights are legally held by the OTO, and what they/he/it do with them (the copyrights) is entirely up to their/his/its wishes, will, or whatever w-word is chosen.


It's my copyright and I'll print if I want to[/align:2i31iwss]


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
04/09/2013 7:22 pm  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:

Most "whines" and "complaints" and "cries of dis-satisfaction" are about the copyrights....

Do you have a problem with that? You have made that point on a number of occasions.

Sorry. When the whining goes on and on, I can't help but say, "Stop whining. There's nothing you can do about it," over and over. It doesn't matter what you, or anyone else "wants," it only matters that OTO will do what they want.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
04/09/2013 7:24 pm  

As far as I can tell, the AC copyrights are legally held by the OTO

Here it is in black and white, the agreement with the receiver:-

http://www.parareligion.ch/dplanet/or/or.htm
Ordo Templi Orientis Phenomenon
Copyrights - Purchase from the Official Receiver (OR)

And more summing up (if you are a glutton for punishment):
http://www.parareligion.ch/dplanet/or/summ.htm


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
04/09/2013 8:04 pm  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Here it is in black and white.

Tell it to your attorney and take it up in court with OTO. I have no time for your references. I'm finished with the whiners and am leaving this thread now. Bye!


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 62
04/09/2013 8:07 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Here it is in black and white.

Tell it to your attorney and take it up in court with OTO. I have no time for your references. I'm finished with the whiners and am leaving this thread now. Bye!

Whoops

Sorry Shiva I was just enjoying a good debate.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
04/09/2013 8:17 pm  

Tell it to your attorney and take it up in court with OTO. I have no time for your references. I'm finished with the whiners and am leaving this thread now. Bye!

That was posted for those who wish to find out more, certainly not for your benefit.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
05/09/2013 4:40 pm  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:

As far as I can tell, the AC copyrights are legally held by the OTO

Here it is in black and white, the agreement with the receiver:-

http://www.parareligion.ch/dplanet/or/or.htm
Ordo Templi Orientis Phenomenon
Copyrights - Purchase from the Official Receiver (OR)

And more summing up (if you are a glutton for punishment):
http://www.parareligion.ch/dplanet/or/summ.htm

Thank Heaven for Saint Peter, the Official Receiver, I mean, Recorder?  Or at least our present-day version of Gerald Yorke, it would seem!  Turns out it was double the price I was informed at the beginning of the process  - there was rampant inflation and interest rates in those days at the time, but even so!

"Shiva" wrote:
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Here it is in black and white.

Tell it to your attorney and take it up in court with OTO. I have no time for your references. I'm finished with the whiners and am leaving this thread now. Bye!

Shiva, you appear to be whining in the process of saying you are finished with the whinging, complaining & the whiners! Me, I’ll stick to a good old wine instead (vintage, if at all possible & preferably! “In vino veritas!” 😉 )

Going back to Hamal’s

Reply #52 on 02 September, 2013, 10:08:22 pm:
I have an edition of Motta's Equinox Vol. V, No. 3: The Chinese Texts of Magick and Mysticism.
Out of interest, what is your understanding of what was or should be in Equinox III No. 7?

Sorry I overlooked your point earlier – although I think it got mainly answered in Reply #57 (I am not sure whether my posts Reply #80 & #81 are going to manifest yet, so  the numbered Reply points may have changed). 

There doesn’t seem any reason for the COTO’s “Tao Te Ching” (“The Equinox” Vol III No. 8 ) not to have included Vol III.7 as well, as even combined it would still have made a pretty small volume. 
Although Motta does mentions that Liber XLIX, “Shi Yi Jian”, “may be published as a separate Special Supplement” to his ‘Chinese Texts’ “The Equinox” Volume V No. 3, this never came to pass.  It would also have made sense to have included both of the III.7 and III.8 items in with the ‘Chinese Texts’, although he does include the “Dao De Jing” along with “The Yi King by Zhou Wen and Zhou Wu, commented” and also Liber XXI, “Jin Gang Jing by Ge Yuang.

"Gin Gang Gooly Gooly Gooly Watcher! Ging Gang Goo Ging Gang Goo…"
N. Joy


ReplyQuote
threefold31
(@threefold31)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 429
06/09/2013 12:59 am  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:

As far as I can tell, the AC copyrights are legally held by the OTO

Here it is in black and white, the agreement with the receiver:-

http://www.parareligion.ch/dplanet/or/or.htm
Ordo Templi Orientis Phenomenon
Copyrights - Purchase from the Official Receiver (OR)

And more summing up (if you are a glutton for punishment):
http://www.parareligion.ch/dplanet/or/summ.htm


Dwtw

Thanks for posting the links. There is mention in a few places of a "Schedule" of copyrighted works apparently authenticated in the 2002 court ruling, but I don't see the actual Schedule anywhere. Does someone here have a copy of this court document listing the works in which Crowley's copyrights subsisted that time? The Official Receiver seems to have sold, in 1991, any rights that 'may' have subsisted, since his office didn't do the research to find out what was under copyright and what was not at that time.

Litlluw
RLG


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 547
06/09/2013 1:04 am  

Going back to Hamal’s

Reply #52 on 02 September, 2013, 10:08:22 pm:
I have an edition of Motta's Equinox Vol. V, No. 3: The Chinese Texts of Magick and Mysticism.
Out of interest, what is your understanding of what was or should be in Equinox III No. 7?

Sorry I overlooked your point earlier – although I think it got mainly answered in Reply #57 (I am not sure whether my posts Reply #80 & #81 are going to manifest yet, so  the numbered Reply points may have changed). 

There doesn’t seem any reason for the COTO’s “Tao Te Ching” (“The Equinox” Vol III No. 8 ) not to have included Vol III.7 as well, as even combined it would still have made a pretty small volume. 
Although Motta does mentions that Liber XLIX, “Shi Yi Jian”, “may be published as a separate Special Supplement” to his ‘Chinese Texts’ “The Equinox” Volume V No. 3, this never came to pass.  It would also have made sense to have included both of the III.7 and III.8 items in with the ‘Chinese Texts’, although he does include the “Dao De Jing” along with “The Yi King by Zhou Wen and Zhou Wu, commented” and also Liber XXI, “Jin Gang Jing by Ge Yuang.

"Gin Gang Gooly Gooly Gooly Watcher! Ging Gang Goo Ging Gang Goo…"
N. Joy

No apology needed, thank you for picking up on it. Ah so if Im reading you right its a volume that never was published? The plot thickens!

Thanks

😀
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
06/09/2013 5:00 am  
"rkaczynski" wrote:
Nevertheless my understanding is that OTO spends far more in producing these works than it makes, so at the end of the day the reality isn't very far from what Michael describes.

I find it hard to believe that they don't make money, but instead lose money, on their publications. Surely, they turned a profit when an edition completely sold out.  Your statement might very well be correct when referring to the, rather pointless IMHO, Best of the Equinox series.  If there is a shortage of manpower and funds in the O.T.O. Inc. then those certainly didn't help.  There is plenty of money to be made and books to be sold, if they published something everyone wants (anything from their list of forthcoming works, in particular, previously unpublished material).

"threefold31" wrote:
I do think it's curious and unfortunate that the A.'.A.'. Holy Books of Thelema have been out of print for so long.

I too think it's curious that ANY of their paperback editions, The Holy Books especially, went out of print.  Scarlet Imprint publishes unlimited paperback editions of ALL of their titles.  I dunno why the O.T.O. Inc. didn't do the same.  It certainly seems like a wonderful idea, to me!

I agree with Shiva that this thread has become rather pointless.  All of this bitching and moaning isn't going to accomplish much of anything.  Surely, the lot of us can come up with something better to discuss.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
06/09/2013 3:27 pm  
"N.O.X" wrote:
I agree with Shiva that this thread has become rather pointless.  All of this bitching and moaning isn't going to accomplish much of anything.  Surely, the lot of us can come up with something better to discuss.

True, this is becoming rather pointless – or not pointless – the central question of the title is surely still relevant – but maybe ‘unproductive’ might be a better word, with a tad more heat generated than light.
I trust my own cool appraisal on the matter is not being included in this!

Of course, some people going quiet & not answering outstanding pertinent questions doesn’t help, naturally; for example,

"N.O.X" wrote:
If there is a shortage of manpower and funds in the O.T.O. Inc. [...] There is plenty of money to be made and books to be sold, if they published something everyone wants (anything from their list of forthcoming works, in particular, previously unpublished material). ...
I too think it's curious that ANY of their paperback editions, The Holy Books especially, went out of print.  Scarlet Imprint publishes unlimited paperback editions of ALL of their titles.  I dunno why the O.T.O. Inc. didn't do the same.  It certainly seems like a wonderful idea, to me!

“All this bitchin’ and moanin’…” – well, anything that has caused a brief smile to play upon and crease my stern features hasn’t been totally unworthwhile… It is rather amusing when those complaining most about the complaining, go on to do a fair amount of the complaining themselves!... (I trust my own cool appraisal on the matter is not being included in this).

"Hamal" wrote:
No apology needed, thank you for picking up on it. Ah so if Im reading you right its a volume that never was published? The plot thickens!

You are well come!  No, Eqx III.7 doesn’t seem to have ever been published again according to the review on Amazon, as I remarked in Reply #57 (and as written there by Lashtal’s own Walterfive, apparently?)  The plot indeed thickens.  A bit like gravy.

"threefold31" wrote:
Thanks for posting the links. There is mention in a few places of a "Schedule" of copyrighted works apparently authenticated in the 2002 court ruling, but I don't see the actual Schedule anywhere. Does someone here have a copy of this court document listing the works in which Crowley's copyrights subsisted that time? The Official Receiver seems to have sold, in 1991, any rights that 'may' have subsisted, since his office didn't do the research to find out what was under copyright and what was not at that time.

Good question. A propos and further to the matter referred to at the end of my Reply #81, I think that the C.O.T.O. should add Gerald Suster to their list of posthumous Saints in their version of the Gnostic Mass - right after Hymeanæus Alpha Grady McMurtry, ‘cos without his input they would have surely kissed goodbye to their 1991 grab of the swag of the copyrights such as they were & not be in the strong position they are now.

"Philip Harris-Smith" wrote:
"Shiva" wrote:
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Here it is in black and white.

Tell it to your attorney and take it up in court with OTO. I have no time for your references. I'm finished with the whiners and am leaving this thread now. Bye!

Whoops

Sorry Shiva I was just enjoying a good debate.

Me too!  "Lighten up", everyone!…

Carry on Keeping on Carrying on
ONJoy


ReplyQuote
Page 2 / 3
Share: