FLW Foundation out of control

To control SPAM, you must now be a registered user to post to this Message Board.

EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.

This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4311
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »


m.perrino
Posts: 310
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:46 pm

Post by m.perrino »

After speaking with my 27 year old nephew regarding "Second Life" ( and having my mind expanded without benefit of injesting anything...) it might have come down to : 1. Money ( revenue generated or anticipated revenue - from the 'store' end of VM ) and/or perhaps more importantly, for the FDN - the ultimate lack of control they would have over participants in Second Life, who could conceivably make, buy, and sell their own FLW buildings, furniture, etc. free from the trademark arm....

Perhaps also it is the lack of comprehension about how new technology can or should be used to further concepts and ideas.

More as it develops.....

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4311
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

m.perrino wrote:Perhaps also it is the lack of comprehension about how new technology can or should be used to further concepts and ideas.
translation: Out-of-touch with the real world... still.

also, from what I have read the FLWVM does not profit from items sold on the SL website. I will try to confirm this when I meet with the C-Exec. Dir of FLWVM in the next few days.[/i]

Mark Hertzberg
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 7:51 am
Contact:

Post by Mark Hertzberg »

Owners of copyrights may sometimes seem petty protecting copyright or registered material, but legally, if you block some uses of a protected name, and let others slide, you may lose the right to protect the brand name altogether because it has become "genericized." I was told this this long ago, and just checked at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark

We do the same thing at the newspaper. Someone thought I was being petty when I called him a month ago and told him to remove a news photo I had shot in conjunction with a tornado story, from a Facebook page unless he wanted us to pursue legal action through FB's arm that deals with that. We cannot let people simply take our copyright material off our website and post it to their Facebook page or redistribute it to friends without credit, permission, or payment to our reprint service. We often give permission for local non-profits to use our photos without paying for them, but they have to get our permission first, and must credit the source of the photo.
Mark Hertzberg
Mark Hertzberg

DavidC
Posts: 7708
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »

For the future of the Foundation's sake, there needs to be some kind of balance struck between 'death-grip' vs. 'free-for-all'. Historically, they have had strong tendencies to adhere to the 'death-grip' control philosophy - with the end result being that, yes, they do end up with great control of their market, but the reach and make-up of that market therefore is very small, limited and limiting in terms of it's broad potential for the FLW audience (both existing and new/expanded).

One of the largest parts of the Foundation's Mission includes "Preserve the works, ideas, and innovative spirit of Frank Lloyd Wright for the benefit of all generations". This makes me wonder what their definition of "all generations" actually is? Is it the few who will gain access through the pittance that Foundation doles out over time? Or will it be those who would otherwise get to know, appreciate and love Wright's work coming to it from avenues outside the Foundation's pervue - for example, the FLW Virtual Museum discussed in this thread - that will now be denied that opportunity and are then 'lost before you've even found them'?


David

Laurie Virr
Posts: 472
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:32 pm

Post by Laurie Virr »

Mr Hertzberg:

Your defense of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation is far from convincing.

It is perfectly understandable that you wish to claim copyright to your own fine work, but for far too long the members of the Foundation have battened and fattened on the work of somebody else. A person, I surmise, that some of them never met.

My reading has led me to believe that when FLLW passed, he had managed to reacquire 3000 acres of his family’s ancestral land in the vicinity of Spring Green.

In 1993 only 600 acres remained, and even that was farmed by sharecroppers. One can only assume that whilst the Fellowship was practicing the Gurdjieff movements, for they had no commissions at the time, their board, lodging and pocket money came as a result of the sale of 2400 acres of land, and all the other items the various FLLW organizations laid claim to.

A recent visit to the Taliesin Preservation Incorporated website, would suggest that with regard to the merchandise now being proffered the organization is scraping the bottom of the barrel. Other FLLW focused organizations appear to be similarly inept. Meanwhile, one finds current photo-images of Taliesin, with stone walls leaning as far out of plumb as it is possible to imagine, projects commenced, and abandoned before completion. It is difficult not to form the impression that for those charged with administering the rehabilitation of what is perhaps FLLW’s finest building, the ability to hold a cocktail glass is of far greater significance than being skillful with a trowel or a saw.

I would suggest that many FLLW enthusiasts are horrified at what has happened. Olgivanna originated the neglect of course, having been obliged to live in a house that had been originally designed for a woman of far greater talents than she. The former’s faithful band have continued her efforts. Their actions are indefensible.

Mark Hertzberg
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 7:51 am
Contact:

Post by Mark Hertzberg »

I am not taking sides. I posted a piece as to why the Foundation may feel compelled to take certain action.

Mark Hertzberg
Mark Hertzberg

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4311
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »


Deke
Posts: 692
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:18 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Deke »

Sorry I missed this online meeting. Did any clearer understanding come from it?

Deke

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4311
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

Deke wrote:Sorry I missed this online meeting.
The hour long session is recorded here:
http://treet.tv/shows/designingworlds

Deke
Posts: 692
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:18 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Deke »

Thanks. Sounds like the big issues are the use of Wright's name in the title of the museum, and - their assumption - that the Foundation was uncomfortable with trying to approve new buildings created for the site.

Deke

DavidC
Posts: 7708
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »

The Foundation might want to unleash their attack dogs on this.


David

DavidC
Posts: 7708
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


Deke
Posts: 692
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:18 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Deke »

The Foundation has trademarked the word Usonian...you can check the online trademark office database about that.

Deke

Wrightgeek
Posts: 1548
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Westerville, Ohio

Post by Wrightgeek »

Deke-

That is very interesting to know considering the following quote I found on the website chasingflw.com, which claims that FLW borrowed the term Usonian from this novel.
Usonian was his word for the United States lifted from the novel Erewhon by Samuel Butler.

Post Reply