




From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 10:49:24 -0700
Subject: Artists' pride (was Re: AY's butterlfies ( or whoever's)) [LONG]

At 09:40 99/06/11 +0200, Ariel wrote:
>First of all, the subject stated "A.Y. or whoever's butterflies", because
>the goal with the email was to question up to what extent can a creator,
>**ANY CREATOR**  stop, deny or prohibit someone from folding models and
>using them in an exhibition. I was publicly asking where the limits between
>a belief and legality are. So the mail was not centered of treating any
>specific creator as a paranoid, but questioning if copyright is for the
>diagrams, not for the physically folded models. I still, expect comments on
>that, since it was the main goal of the mail.

Yes, I got that, and we have discussed it to death already. Legally, there
is little that can be done because the law is not designed to protect
origami (or similar arts like needle crafts, etc.). Check the archives for
past discussions.

>I mentioned A.Y just because of quoting Nick's remark that contained a
>reference to A.Y. Otherwise I wouldn't have even mentioned him. However he
>is a good example of a conflicting creator.

Yes, a very good example, which is why I continued using it.

>Secondly, I do not subscribe to the worshiping and gloryfication of a normal
>human being just because he is smart at folding models.

I do not worship any "normal human being". Not for folding skill, not for
musical talent, acting ability, nor athletic prowess. In the case of
Yoshizawa, we have met and we have gotten along well with each other. That's
it. I consider him a friend...well, as much of a friend as a 60 year age gap
and a language barrier can permit, anyway.

>A.Y is a human being. Not more , not less. He is not halfway between the
>Gods and we, mere mortals. He is just like you and the guy next door. I
>think many in the list forget that he is a human, and he is as imperfect as
>any human is.

You get no disagreement from me here. I respect his talent, but I do not
consider him a better person than me because of it.

>For example, let's remember how Yoshizawa handled the Cerceda issue.
>....text deleted...
>Only because he is smart at folding paper
>doesn't me for me he has the moral status of Ghandi or something. He folds
>paper, he is not Garibaldi, nor Mother Theresa of Calcuta. He is a person
>like anyone else.

And those others are human, too. By what measure do you make them out to be
more than human?

>Though the aim of this email is not trying to probe that A.Y is a human
>being like the rest,  let's anyway continue a little bit more with that:
>
>He said that his methodology for creating a bird model, for example, was to
>sit in backyard/garden and watch the bird until the spirit of the bird came
>unto him and then, without hesitation, he folded the model in one run.
>
>So he never makes a mistake, he doesn't use trial and error, he never
>experiments with a form until he reaches a goal.
>For me, that affirmation is of a childish nature. That is conciously trying
>to create a mystical atmosphere around oneself, which many pop and rock
>stars do. Does anyone disagree on this ? Does anyone believe he really
>designs all his models in the first try because the soul of the animal gets
>into him ? Can we take that seriously ?

That is how it works FOR HIM. Think of it this way: he has practiced so much
that folding has become a natural activity for him. He knows what he must do
to the paper to achieve the effect he wants. So, as he watches the bird, he
reduces it to those key elements that he must reproduce in the paper, and
then he folds it, no trial and error needed. But, in fact, all of the trial
and error has already taken place years before. Now all he must do is to
draw upon the experience. There you have it: a non-mystical way of
explaining what TO HIM is a mystical experience. But you cannot disallow his
perception of how he does his work. That is truly childish.

>Thirdly, he said " everone copies me", but that maybe was a translation
>mistake, so let's be as fair as possible.
>
>Nonetheless he is known ( please correct me on this) for not wanting to
>teach his best models, but the simplest. He doesn't even let creators take a
>close, detailed look at his models, he shows them at distance and for some
>seconds, in case someone would copy him. Again, I see no trace of a higher
>spirituality behind that.

I had plenty of opportunity to examine his models, and I did for a few of
them. However, since time was short (I was late arriving at his house
because I got lost, and he was also not feeling particularly well), I wanted
to see as many of his treasures as possible, and he wanted to show me more,
too.

As for not wanting to teach his best models, there is another side to the
issue. He has always had difficulty expressing the true nature of his models
using diagrams. This is because so many of his models depend upon subtle
shaping to achieve the desired effect. It is not possible to show this
clearly with diagrams, or even with video. Personal instruction is required,
and language is important. I believe that this is why he does not teach his
"best models" except to his long-time students in Japan. They understand
what he is saying, and the techniques required to get the models right. I've
seen one of his classes in Japan, and saw the care he took in reviewing his
students' models.

>And I openly raise the question whether his strange behaviour ( like not
>letting paper touch the table while folding and the like) is really a true
>mystical or religious belief, or just a planned, concious way of creating an
>atmosphere of mystery around him.

He prefers to fold in the air. That's his choice. I've been to his classes
where he has both recommended folding in the air, and on the table,
depending on the model being taught.

>Finally, he is a guy that folds paper. And for the points exposed above, he
>behaves, in my humble opinion like, say, any other human being. I am sorry
>to say it, but that is what I think.  And to this I also refer myself to the
>attitude with which he attended the spanish convention a few years ago. He
>is known to behave like a Hollywood diva and so he did in Spain. He can
>perfeclty overcome any language barrier if he believes he is not treated
>enough like a Diva. Anyone disagreeing on this ?

>....text deleted...

>So, we like it or not,  he can be the greatest paper folder, but  apart from
>origami, he is a mere human being. And sometimes, if not often, he behaves
>like anyone else in the show biz.

But, Ariel, as I've said before, your opinion is not humble at all. For some
reason, you do not like this man. That is your choice. He is not perfect.
Indeed, he has many character flaws. Show me someone who does not. However,
you know him for what he is: a talented man.

>Finally, and once again, the goal of my email was questioning up to what
>extent can he (or for the case, any other) prevent, say, Jan, from selling
>butterflies. A.Y says that his creations have a life of their own and blah
>blah blah. Even though one can respect any religious belief, even if it is
>grounded on things that nothing have to do with religion, the question is,
>still, up to what extent can a creator on behalf of a non-standart mystical
>belief prohibit people from exposing folded models that were just folded
>upon a publicly published book.

The point I made in my previous message (which you seem to have missed), is
that we all know what he is like. What are we going to do about it? Some
people (like me) can live with it. Others (like Ariel) cannot.

At this time, designers have no legal way of prohibiting people from
"exposing folded models that were just folded upon a publicly published
book". But how we respond to their wishes determines how willing they will
be to share in the future. In the case of Yoshizawa, it is likely that
continued attacks and ignoring of his wishes will mean that he will no
longer share what he does. So we can get all upset about his imperfections
and ignore his wishes, and the result will be that he stops sharing. Or we
can accept him for who he is and encourage him to continue sharing by
respecting his wishes. It is our choice, and I think that we would all
benefit more from making the second choice.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 11:27:51 +0200
Subject: Re: Think Quest Junior Contest Winner

Guess there was a minor typo in the URL. I found The Pieces 'n Creases
page at http://tqjunior.advanced.org/5402/

Matthias





From: Evi <d.evi.l@MUENSTER.DE>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 11:42:46 +0200
Subject: Re: AY's butterlfies ( or whoever's)

Hi Ariel,

>...Or of a higly
>...educated man. Or of a hiugher spirituality and mastery. So we have to
admit,

>For me, that affirmation is of a childish nature. That is conciously trying
>to create a mystical atmosphere around oneself, which many pop and rock
>stars do.

Well, this is exactly what almost all artists act like. This may first of
all be a result of society's attitude towards artist and their work.

1. Art, no matter which kind, is often looked upon as being a nice hobby, no
real hard work, something the artist shouldn't get money for.

2. Artists, who studied 10 years at the art-academy, often get to hear: my
little five year old son can do this too.

3. Art is supposed to be useless. (first you need food, clothes,
housing,...art comes last.)

4. The competition among artists themselves is big. There is sometimes
grudge.

5. Feelings are involved in the work, that's why artists can hardly stand
criticism.

6. On one hand many people admire creators. But they are also not respected
because of their low income. Everybody waits for them to die, so the
paintings become more valuable.

7. Artist usually are very intelligent, and of a higher spirituality and
mastery. They've got a special talent. They see more, and look different at
things than "normal" people do. They are aware and proud of it.

These are some reasons, why artists are forced, more or less on purpose, to
create some mystical atmosphere around oneself as kind of protection. More
than the guy next door, they are constantly confronted with their own
feelings. They usually care less about other peoples problems. A lot of them
are eccentric.
They turn their inside out and are digging deeply in the humans souls,
finding not only nice things there. May be this makes them become strange,
too.

A canvas for example is like a mirror for an artist, and also a surface for
projection.
Extreme natures are spending almost their whole life in front of it, working
night and day, having no time for eating, washing, or developing good
behaviour.
Some are finding  interesting models in dirty streets, not that much in
flowerarrangements.
Later on they cut off their own ear, shoot themselves  or beat up their
current wife, if they have one at all. (of course not all of them, there are
such and such)

Creators are of course human beings, but their life is a different one.
First of all they work for themselves and not for money. But they sometimes
need to eat, too. This is why the legislater had to came up with all this
copyright stuff.

So lets collect money for the lonely, starving artists. Send it to my bank
account, please.
Female artists have a special hard life. :o)

Please forgive me Ariel, but what else can I say, I am an artist too, of
course not the eccentric kind, .....I guess. :o)

By the way, are there any stolen, bookcopied diagrams available? Can't get
enough of that stuff! :o))))

Happy folding
d-evi-l





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 11:46:17 -0700
Subject: Re: AY's butterlfies ( or whoever's)

>Hi Ariel,
>
>>...Or of a higly
>>...educated man. Or of a hiugher spirituality and mastery. So we have to
>admit,
>
>>For me, that affirmation is of a childish nature. That is conciously trying
>>to create a mystical atmosphere around oneself, which many pop and rock
>>stars do.
>
>Well, this is exactly what almost all artists act like. This may first of
>all be a result of society's attitude towards artist and their work.
>
>1. Art, no matter which kind, is often looked upon as being a nice hobby, no
>real hard work, something the artist shouldn't get money for.
>
>2. Artists, who studied 10 years at the art-academy, often get to hear: my
>little five year old son can do this too.
>
>3. Art is supposed to be useless. (first you need food, clothes,
>housing,...art comes last.)
>
>4. The competition among artists themselves is big. There is sometimes
>grudge.
>
>5. Feelings are involved in the work, that's why artists can hardly stand
>criticism.
>
>6. On one hand many people admire creators. But they are also not respected
>because of their low income. Everybody waits for them to die, so the
>paintings become more valuable.
>
>7. Artist usually are very intelligent, and of a higher spirituality and
>mastery. They've got a special talent. They see more, and look different at
>things than "normal" people do. They are aware and proud of it.
>
>These are some reasons, why artists are forced, more or less on purpose, to
>create some mystical atmosphere around oneself as kind of protection. More
>than the guy next door, they are constantly confronted with their own
>feelings. They usually care less about other peoples problems. A lot of them
>are eccentric.
>They turn their inside out and are digging deeply in the humans souls,
>finding not only nice things there. May be this makes them become strange,
>too.
>
>A canvas for example is like a mirror for an artist, and also a surface for
>projection.
>Extreme natures are spending almost their whole life in front of it, working
>night and day, having no time for eating, washing, or developing good
>behaviour.
>Some are finding  interesting models in dirty streets, not that much in
>flowerarrangements.
>Later on they cut off their own ear, shoot themselves  or beat up their
>current wife, if they have one at all. (of course not all of them, there are
>such and such)
>
>Creators are of course human beings, but their life is a different one.
>First of all they work for themselves and not for money. But they sometimes
>need to eat, too. This is why the legislater had to came up with all this
>copyright stuff.
>
>So lets collect money for the lonely, starving artists. Send it to my bank
>account, please.
>Female artists have a special hard life. :o)
>
>Please forgive me Ariel, but what else can I say, I am an artist too, of
>course not the eccentric kind, .....I guess. :o)
>
>By the way, are there any stolen, bookcopied diagrams available? Can't get
>enough of that stuff! :o))))
>
>
>Happy folding
>d-evi-l

Very well put.  You have a beautiful, poetic mind.  Hopefully you're not
one of those starving artists.

David





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 12:52:11 -0400
Subject: Re: Butterfly competition

At 04:18 PM 6/9/99 +0100, you wrote:
>Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH> sez
>
>>Competitions aren't fair, eh?
>
>Some aren't, but that's down to whoever sets the rules.

A competition of folded models cannot be 100% objective (should we count
the number of valleys and mountains?...), that is, the judgement will be
some kind of subjective. But everybody knows that, aren't they?

>It will be interesting to see what happens if someone wins a free trip
>using a design by another creator & that creator objects to their design
>being used in this way.

The competition is about _folding_ butterflies, not about _creating_
butterlies. However, as we mentioned, you can send your own creation if you
want, but it's not the case.

>Copyright issues usually emerge when there's money or rewards at stake.
You can >bet that most entrants won't seek permission in advance.

If you check it, you'll see a place in the participation form where the
name of the model's creator should be written, so if someone _folds_
someone else's model, the creator will me credited. I see no copyright
issue when Johnny folds Jack's model from Jack's book which Johnny has
bought for $$$, even if he will win a prize (if he gets the prize for his
_folding_, not the creation).

>This probably won't happen, but my advice is to be careful - what if
>someone wins using a Yoshizawa design? AY isn't keen on other people
>exhibiting their own versions of his designs,

The models that he has published in books? Too late, I say!
The models he hasn't? We cannot fold them, anyway!

>much less winning expensive prizes using them.

By _folding_ them.

Happy _Folding_!

Peter Budai





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 12:52:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Realistic flying origami helicopter?

Sebastian Kirsch wrote:

>One of these was the helicopter-like thingy, which was a bamboo rotor, maybe
>10cm across, with a thin bamboo rod attached to it at a right angle:
> ______ ______
>/______/_____/    <- rotor
>       |
>       |
>       |
>       |          <- rod
>       |
>       |

I don' know the name for it but I have one at home :-)  Yea!

>Anyway, I've been pondering about whether one could make one of these
>from paper.
>...
>OK, I should have done this some months ago. I just folded a small
>practice model (nothing elaborate -- just a bird base with the bottom
>narrowed into thirds, and the top wings folded out),
>...

Maybe a simple box-pleated design would do the trick (I haven't tried it
-so far-). I mean something like this:

_________________
|\|_|_|_|_|_|_|/|
|_|\|_|_|_|_|/|_|
|_|_|\|_|_|/|_|_|
|_|_|_|\|/|_|_|_|       (Crease pattern)
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|

Hope you could decipher the main idea! :-)

>Heck, I'm giving it all away -- I'll never achieve anything that way. In
>half an hour, one of you with more time, experience, or stamina, will
>have hacked up a perfect version of this, and where will I be then? ;-)

This is suspicious... I bet you have the perfect solution and now you're
just fooling us in to make some poor solutions so that you can say you have
made the best and be on the front page of every origami magazine all over
the world! ;-)

Happy rotating! Just don't feel dizzy...

Peter Budai





From: Christopher Holt <Ella-mae@EMAIL.MSN.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 13:05:41 -0700
Subject: Re: I am interested

I saw this in my e-mail this morning...

> On Fri, 21 May you wrote
>
> >If anyone is interested I have designed a cat based on a character from a
> >Japanese animated film called Kiki's Delivery Service' if anyone would
like
> >the diagrams let me know (including the preferred file format). The cat
is
> >fairly realistic but the aim was to make it as cute as the character in
the
> >fim.
>
> I like cats very much, and I'd like to have your Kiki's model in .pdf
> format (Acrobat Reader).
>
> Thanks in advance,
>                   Daniela.

And would like to see the .pdf diagrams as well!!! All the best-c (e-mail:
ella-mae@msn.com)!!!!





From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Juan_L=F3pez_Figueroa?= <juanlopez@TELELINE.ES>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 14:13:09 +0200
Subject: Re: Montroll's chess (was Re: Lang's insects)

-----Mensaje original-----
De:     Origami Mailing List [mailto:Origami@MIT.Edu] En nombre de david
whitbeck
Enviado el:     viernes, 11 de junio de 1999 9:21
Para:   ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Asunto: Re: Lang's insects (was Re: Elephant fold)

To everybody: And while I'm at it (don't just love those horrible
transitions) I just got Origami Inside Out (John Montroll)today and I was
wondering if anybody knew how big does the paper have to be for the chess
pieces so that they'll fit on the chess board.  I'm planning on using a 9x9
piece of paper so the chess board will be 2x2 which means that each square
will be 1/4x1/4 which puts an upperbound on the base of each piece.  Has
somebody on this group folded the chess board and pieces and can tell me
the dimensions for the pieces?  I can't wait to fold the racoon, tiger and
cow.

David

Hello folders!

It's my first mail for the list and my English is very bad.
I have folded the Montroll's chess with a piece of papier of 40x40 inchs the
board and 4x4 inchs the pieces. You can play chess easily with this
proportion.
Happy folding

Juan      =(87o)

Juanlopez@teleline.es





From: Russell Sutherland <RGS467@AOL.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 16:29:48 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Chatrooms

In a message dated 6/11/99 1:32:18 PM Central Daylight Time,
supersuzy2000@HOTMAIL.COM writes:

<<
 Does anyone know of any origami 'chatrooms' on the internet.  I've seen
 charooms on Yahoo Chat which are for other hobbies and there's one for
 Japanese Anime but there's not one for origami. :-(
  >>

Hey Suzy,

We started a weekly chat online with the help of Alex Barber @
the-village.com about a year ago and have since moved our chats to my origami
clubsite, PAPER WONDERS on YAHOO.  I discovered the potential of setting up
this clubsite last month.

PAPER WONDERS is a great clubsite.... Yahoo has the site already built, so
all we had to do is move in : ) .  At this site you will find an Email forum,
chatroom, photo galleries, calendar of events, etc.... We have found this
chat applet to be much more reliable than our old chatsite's.... and it even
has a number of "special features" to play around with.

Currently in the photo galleries are pics of clubmembers' works... (quite
impressive I might add)... and pics from my recent trip to the MFPP Origami
Convention in PARIS last month.

Our chats are held on TUESDAYS at 8 PM CST.... that's 2AM GMT : \   We are
considering starting a seperate chat time designed for those who can't make
the regular TUESDAY chats.... That time will be posted soon at the clubsite
in the CALENDAR.

I am cutting and pasting this "invitation" to join my club..... IT'S FREE...
What do you have to lose???

<clip>

Hello!

You have been invited by rgs467 to join the Listed
Yahoo! Club named "Paper Wonders".

To become a member of this club, just go to the
Web address below:
http://edit.clubs.yahoo.com/config/sjg?.k=F1C3761703fRd6Od

You need to go to the address above to join the club,
but you can take a look at the club by going to:
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/paperwonders

You can learn more about rgs467 by
looking at the Yahoo! Public Profile:
http://profiles.yahoo.com/rgs467

Note: This invitation will expire after 7 days, or after
being used.

A Yahoo! Club is a great way to bring friends, family or
anyone you know together using the latest in Web
technologies. Club members are able to take advantage of
a club's private chat room, message boards and other
features. You can also create your own free club focused
on any interest, such as hobbies, families and industry
associations.

Clubs are either listed or unlisted. Listed clubs are
available to the public while unlisted clubs are
available exclusively to those who receive invitations.

If you have no interest in joining this club, there is
no need for you to do anything. You will not be
enrolled as a member.

Thanks,

The Yahoo! Clubs team
http://clubs.yahoo.com/

P.S. If you need some help on getting started, go to:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/clubs/
 </clip>

Please feel free to Email me if you have any more questions.

Sincerely,
Russell Sutherland
RGS467@AOL.com

DARE TO CHAT!!!!!!!!





From: Susan Johnston <supersuzy2000@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 19:25:46 +0100 (
Subject: Origami Magazines?

Hi again!

I was just wondering, whether there are any origami magazines sold in
ENGLAND apart from the ones from the different origami societies.  (By this
I mean ones sold in newsagents etc)  Thanks.

Susan Johnston

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





From: Susan Johnston <supersuzy2000@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 19:29:52 +0100 (
Subject: Chatrooms

Hi its me again asking about something else this time!

Does anyone know of any origami 'chatrooms' on the internet.  I've seen
charooms on Yahoo Chat which are for other hobbies and there's one for
Japanese Anime but there's not one for origami. :-(

If you do know of any, please let me know. Thanks in advance.

Susan Johnston ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





From: Vincent & Veronique <osele@MULTIMANIA.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 21:40:23 +0200
Subject: NOA contact

Hello,

Lionel Albertino, a great french folder, try to find a contact (email) in
NOA association.
Have you some info that I can send to him ?
It's for his next book, which will be on human models.

Have you bough his last one : Safari Origami : Lot of complex but
wonderful models, with new way of folding, new bases...
NO ?!? go to http://www.bol.fr/ (or pearharps www.bol.com)

I don't have any money back but Lionel is french as me you
anderstand my poor english :-))) and his book is very good.

Origamicalement
Vincent

--
 _______  Osele Vincent (Toulouse/France) Membre du MFPP     _____
|       | osele@multimania.com                              /|    |
|       | liste: origami-fr@povlab.org                     /_|    |
|       | http://www.multimania.com/osele/origami.htm     |       |
|_______| -----------------> ORIGAMI -------------------> |_______|





From: Susan Johnston <supersuzy2000@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 21:56:24 +0100 (
Subject: Re: Chatrooms

To Russell,

Thanks loads for the invitation and the other info.  I'm now a member of it.
  The only bit which i don't like is that i have to get up at 2 am to talk
on the chat room!!!  I hope you can sort something out about that!  Thanks
anyway.  What a wonderful idea!

Susan Johnston

>From: Russell Sutherland <RGS467@AOL.COM>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: Chatrooms
>Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 16:29:48 EDT
>
>In a message dated 6/11/99 1:32:18 PM Central Daylight Time,
>supersuzy2000@HOTMAIL.COM writes:
>
><<
>  Does anyone know of any origami 'chatrooms' on the internet.  I've seen
>  charooms on Yahoo Chat which are for other hobbies and there's one for
>  Japanese Anime but there's not one for origami. :-(
>   >>
>
>
>Hey Suzy,
>
>We started a weekly chat online with the help of Alex Barber @
>the-village.com about a year ago and have since moved our chats to my
>origami
>clubsite, PAPER WONDERS on YAHOO.  I discovered the potential of setting up
>this clubsite last month.
>
>PAPER WONDERS is a great clubsite.... Yahoo has the site already built, so
>all we had to do is move in : ) .  At this site you will find an Email
>forum,
>chatroom, photo galleries, calendar of events, etc.... We have found this
>chat applet to be much more reliable than our old chatsite's.... and it
>even
>has a number of "special features" to play around with.
>
>Currently in the photo galleries are pics of clubmembers' works... (quite
>impressive I might add)... and pics from my recent trip to the MFPP Origami
>Convention in PARIS last month.
>
>Our chats are held on TUESDAYS at 8 PM CST.... that's 2AM GMT : \   We are
>considering starting a seperate chat time designed for those who can't make
>the regular TUESDAY chats.... That time will be posted soon at the clubsite
>in the CALENDAR.
>
>I am cutting and pasting this "invitation" to join my club..... IT'S
>FREE...
>What do you have to lose???
>
><clip>
>
>Hello!
>
>You have been invited by rgs467 to join the Listed
>Yahoo! Club named "Paper Wonders".
>
>To become a member of this club, just go to the
>Web address below:
>http://edit.clubs.yahoo.com/config/sjg?.k=F1C3761703fRd6Od
>
>You need to go to the address above to join the club,
>but you can take a look at the club by going to:
>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/paperwonders
>
>You can learn more about rgs467 by
>looking at the Yahoo! Public Profile:
>http://profiles.yahoo.com/rgs467
>
>Note: This invitation will expire after 7 days, or after
>being used.
>
>A Yahoo! Club is a great way to bring friends, family or
>anyone you know together using the latest in Web
>technologies. Club members are able to take advantage of
>a club's private chat room, message boards and other
>features. You can also create your own free club focused
>on any interest, such as hobbies, families and industry
>associations.
>
>Clubs are either listed or unlisted. Listed clubs are
>available to the public while unlisted clubs are
>available exclusively to those who receive invitations.
>
>If you have no interest in joining this club, there is
>no need for you to do anything. You will not be
>enrolled as a member.
>
>Thanks,
>
>The Yahoo! Clubs team
>http://clubs.yahoo.com/
>
>
>P.S. If you need some help on getting started, go to:
>http://help.yahoo.com/help/clubs/
>  </clip>
>
>Please feel free to Email me if you have any more questions.
>
>Sincerely,
>Russell Sutherland
>RGS467@AOL.com
>
>DARE TO CHAT!!!!!!!!

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





From: Emmajg <emmajg@CUSTARD.ORG>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 22:02:12 +0100
Subject: Re: Origami Magazines?

I've not seen any, but let me know you do find any.
Or why don't we start making a magazine ??

Emmajg*
-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Johnston <supersuzy2000@HOTMAIL.COM>
To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 11 June 1999 20:28
Subject: Origami Magazines?

>Hi again!
>
>I was just wondering, whether there are any origami magazines sold in
>ENGLAND apart from the ones from the different origami societies.  (By this
>I mean ones sold in newsagents etc)  Thanks.
>
>Susan Johnston
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





From: Emmajg <emmajg@CUSTARD.ORG>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 22:06:09 +0100
Subject: Re: Fw: looking for graduation cap fold

Hello and thank you for all your help I now have a diagram and will attempt
to fold it :o)
thanks again to all especially Mike Naughton
take care
Emmajg*
http://chocolate.custard.org/origami
-----Original Message-----
From: Shi-Yew Chen (a.k.a. Sy) <sychen@EROLS.COM>
To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 05 June 1999 03:40
Subject: Fw: looking for graduation cap fold

>Hi, everyone,
>I got one private request mail for mortarboard model made out of money. It
>should be easy if tassel can be neglected (I shouldn't say that). But I
have
>no interest to diagram it or to give detailed instruction. For those money
>fold fans please respond to her privately. It might be already published.
Or
>some of the related threads I missed. I just don't know where to get it.
See
>attached mail if interested. Thanks.
>
>Sy Chen
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Emma Jane Griffiths <emmajg@chocolate.custard.org>
>To: Shi-Yew Chen (a.k.a. Sy) <sychen@erols.com>
>Date: Thursday, June 03, 1999 5:01 AM
>Subject: Re: looking for graduation cap fold
>
>
>>yes thats what i'm on about
>>how can one be made?
>>emmajg8
>>On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Shi-Yew Chen (a.k.a. Sy)
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry. I don't know. If you are talking about mortar board w/o tassel.
It
>>> could be done easily.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Emmajg <emmajg@custard.org>
>>> To: sychen@erols.com <sychen@erols.com>
>>> Date: Sunday, May 30, 1999 11:38 AM
>>> Subject: looking for graduation cap fold
>>>
>>>
>>> >hi
>>> >not sure if you can help I'm looking for a graduation cap fold I think
>it's
>>> >made from dollar. anyway if you know where I can get the fold from
>please
>>> >Email me thanks
>>> >Emmajg*
>>> >Emma Jane Griffiths
>>> >http://chocolate.custard.org
>>> >Mobile: 07971 083069
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>> - - - -- - - - - - -
>>Emma Jane Griffiths
>>http://chocolate.custard.org





From: Yurii and Katrin Shumakovs <origami@AAANET.RU>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 00:39:56 +0300
Subject: Re: Chatrooms

Hello, Susan.

There are two Yahoo clubs on Origami, which we know. There there are
chatrooms.
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/paperwonders
and
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/jonathanheartorigamiwizard

Yurii and Katrin Shumakov

ORILAND - THE PAPER'S WORLD
www.origami.aaanet.ru
Yurii and Katrin Shumakov,
Origami artists and psychologists
origami@aaanet.ru
ICQ UIN 37464409





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 06:14:43 -1000
Subject: Re: AY's butterlfies ( or whoever's)

>
> I remember someone on the list having had a conflict on this subject..was in
> Jan "Aloha" ? I would like to hear more about what happened then...

>Rather than rehashing the whole thing, is it somewhere in the archives?

And, you may think that that was extreme paranoia but...what about being
asked not to fold to give away models as gifts because it might cut into
someone else's business? (I was folding a lot of this models to give
away at a festival).  This person learned the model from a demo in a
department store and I learned it from him.  He however is afraid that
if I give it away, people will get the idea that it can be made from
paper other than the paper he is selling to make the pretty models.  At
least A.Y. created the model.  This person simply transported it to
Hawaii.  However, I respect all points of view so I stopped making them
but I will give away the models I made already...maybe to tourist who
aren't smart enough to figure out that origami can really be made from
any kind of paper.  Aloha, Jan





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 06:58:15 -1000
Subject: Re: Butterfly competition

Michael LaFosse says:
> I look at this as a performer's contest and I am glad to see it.  Creators are
> important to origami, but quality performers need to be encouraged too.  After
> all,  the rendition of the work is done by a folder, whether the folder is the
> designer or not. Let's see more venues like this - prizes or not.
>
> Michael LaFosse

What a sweetheart you are Michael.  I love your butterflies.  They are
doing very well in my jewelery collection.  At first I thought they
might be too fragile to use as jewelry but I don't know what I feared
because the washi is so strong and your design so lovely that I know
people will take care of it to make it last.

Aloha and Mahalo (thank you), Jan





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 08:13:17 -1000
Subject: Polite resquest on "Whoa on Yoshizawa -bashing"

Whoa on Yoshizawa-bashing.  First of all, I would like to correct some
misconceptions about what Yoshizawa wrote to me concerning his butterfly
and frog.
1. He did not try to "prevent" me from selling his models.  He stated
that my letter made him sad because I did not inform him prior to
selling his models.  He did not want me to make them anymore.

2. He wished his works to bring happiness to many people and wanted the
right development of origami created from his heart.

His letter was written by way of a translater and very brief.  It
indicates to me that there was much he would have said if he could have
done it with the fluency of a common language.  I did not want to guess
at what his attitude, intentions, purposes, etc. could have been when I
knew so little about him and had no other personal contact with him.  My
request and sharing on the list was to have those who might have met him
and who knew him better to shed some light.  I really have no grudges or
problems with what his choices are since I have already long substituted
his models for others.

There were many interesting insights and possibilities of
interpretations of this man.  His "diva" status has been granted to him
by his country and rightly so.

He is no villain to me and it's starting to bother me that I am being
touted as one who is proof of how "warped" he is.  Far be it for me to
say, don't talk about him as you do, do as you wish but please withdraw
me as an example.  It seems to get worse the farther in time we get from
that actual discussion and I hate to imagine what might further be
misconscrued about someone who really loves origami and who has shared
so much of it with us.

Aloha, Jan





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 10:17:51 -1000
Subject: Re: More about Butterfly competition!

Dino,
        As you know, origami that is left "sitting" for a day plus... loosen
up.  Are we allowed to "glue", "tac" it in place on something so as to
keep it in the sharpest creased form? i.e. butterfly placed on a leaf,
rock etc.

Aloha, Jan





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 11:18:38 -1000
Subject: Re: More about Butterfly competition!

david whitbeck wrote:
>
> >Dino,
> >        As you know, origami that is left "sitting" for a day plus... loosen
> >up.  Are we allowed to "glue", "tac" it in place on something so as to
> >keep it in the sharpest creased form? i.e. butterfly placed on a leaf,
> >rock etc.
> >
> >Aloha, Jan
>
> I'm curious about what kind of paper that happens so that I can avoid it.

The paper I use is printed washi.  The paper is wonderful for making
jewelry and longevity is a requirement in something you sell but the
paper itself loses its crease in time.  However, when glued down and
lacquered, I'm ready to say it may last "forever".  Jan





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 11:24:24 -1000
Subject: Re: Polite resquest on "Whoa on Yoshizawa -bashing"

Rob Moes wrote:
>
> It's obvious to me that Jan Fodor simply did not wish to offend "the
> Master," which is her prerogative.  No need to belabor that point any
> further, I hope!
>
> It's also obvious that Yoshizawa the mighty Pharaoh wishes to be buried
> with so many of his origami children beside him.  That is also his
> prerogative.  I'm sure he's fully aware that people will declare him to be
> wasteful and self-serving.
>
> We all do what we think is best.
>
> Rob
> robert.moes@snet.net  --> robmoes@earthlink.net

Offending or not offending Yoshizawa is not a strong consideration.  I
just am getting tired of name calling and people projecting what he may
be thinking.  What purpose does it serve?  At least I'm here to say what
I think, he is not.  Say what you think...totally acceptable, please
don't guess what I'm may be saying or thinking.





From: Carol Martinson <carolm47@YAHOO.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 16:03:32 -0700
Subject: Re: Seduction and Origami

--- Nick Robinson wrote

> I've never managed to seduce any women using
> origami, original or
> otherwise!

When I was in college many years ago, I taught one of my male friends
from grade school how to fold the Thurber Dog found in one of the
Randlett books.  It is a fairly easy model and very forgiving of
beginner's mistakes.

A few months later I heard from another person that this young man was
going around campus and showing young ladies how to fold Thurber Dogs
and using that as a technique to pick them up.  I was told he was very
successful in picking them up, but of course the young man in question
never told me how he was using his new found skill.

Carol Martinson
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com





From: David Whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 17:58:08 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] Re:      Re: Sv:      Re: Realistic flying origami helicopter?

I can tell you as an avid Montroll fan that he has published a myriad of
books, but none that I know of that discuss his design techniques, but you
can get a good sense of the techniques themselves by simply buying one or
two of his books.  Some of my favorites are: Origami Scultptures, North
American Animals, African Animals, Mythological Creatures and the Chinese
Zodiac, Origami for the Enthusiast, Origami Sea Life, so okay I admit I
like about everything he wrote.  My top nomination would be Origami
Sculptures, but since it limits itself mostly to the dog base and the
insect base another book like North American Animals might be better to
see some variation on bases.

David

ps does anybody know when his next book will be out and what will the
theme be?

On Sat, 12 Jun 1999, Ronald Koh wrote:

> I've been on Origami-L for something like two weeks, and it has been quite an
> educational experience; computer viruses and quirks, paleontology,
     aerodynamics
> - you name it. It didn't take long to know who the jokers are! And the
> controversy ....
>
> While we are in that kind of mood, here's another one: That fruit is no kiwi -
> it's a Chinese gooseberry - no, its not a cross between a goose and a berry -
> that somehow found it's way to NZ from China. And the over-ripe ones do fly -
> with the help of human propulsion, and if the target is tempting enough (want
> some, Ariel? Plenty in Singapore).
>
> On a more serious note, although it may sound silly: Can someone please tell
     me
> where I can get info on Montroll's closed back concept, design, or whatever? I
> live in the backwaters of origami, and the first I ever heard of it was over
> Origami-L.
>
> Regards.
>
> madawson wrote:
>
> > Kiwi - A wingless, flightless fruit.
> >
> > But the apple.......... while it does not fly up, Newton discovered that it
> > does fly down! (Although not gracefully)  But does it rotate while it
> > falls????? <g>
> >
> > MASD
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
> > To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
> > Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 3:07 PM
> > Subject: Re: Sv: Re: Realistic flying origami helicopter?
> >
> > >ThoKalmon,
> > >At 00.46 10/6/1999 +0200, you wrote:
> > >
> > >>Does the Kiwi have wings ?
> > >>
> > >
> > >No. It belongs to the genus Apteryx, meaning "without wings". To be exact,
> > >its feathers hide a pair of rough useless "wings" a few cm. long.
> > >
> > >The kiwi FRUIT, however, has NO wings at all. Not even beak, legs or tail.
> > >A very sad thing.
> > >
> > >Roberto





From: Cathy <cathypl@GENERATION.NET>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 18:37:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Betsy Ross folding?

I also thank you, i'm always looking for neat stuff like that for school kids.

                        CAthy

At 04:22 PM 99-06-09 -0700, you wrote:
>I remember doing this as a kid. Here's a website I found that explains it:
>
>http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagstar.html
>
>
>John Marcolina
>San Jose, CA.
>jmarcoli@cisco.com
>
>
>
******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****

Cathy Palmer-Lister
Ste. Julie, Quebec
Canada
cathypl@generation.net





From: Pat Slider <slider@STONECUTTER.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 19:37:23 -0700
Subject: To origami consumers (was AY's butterlfies...was copyright ad nauseum)

I've been pondering this interminable and ever-repeating topic for a while,
so please bear with me as I put forth a few points, some surely redundant
some not completely thought through, to add to the mix.

I for one deem all diagrammed models as gifts. The designers certainly
don't receive any significant renumeration for publishing. I certainly
appreciate their willingness to share so I can enjoy the folding and, I
hope, learn some new techniques.

Lately it seems to me that a portion of the origami community has become
somewhat demanding about obtaining diagrams and using these diagrams
however they want contrary to the wishes of the person who created the
model. This seems quite contrary to the spirit of sharing that the diagrams
were created in.

Whatever the intricacies of copyright law, I believe that ignoring the
wishes of those who publish will discourage many from publishing in the
future. (I know of one published creator who is now pursuing other
interests after too many upsetting experiences stemming from the generous
sharing of a model. These negatives have taken away some of the joy this
person had creating and sharing.) Why publish when publishing means
essentially losing control of and sometimes losing recognition for the
model?

I think something is awry when folding models designed by others for the
purpose of reselling them is considered acceptable and some kind of
inalienable right. If I learned to watercolor by watching someone paint a
particular landscape in a video would I then go out and sell the same
landscape? I don't think so. I would hope that I would use the techniques
to go and create something unique of my own. Perhaps it might take years
and perhaps I might never achieve a "sellable" painting, but I don't think
many would respect me for just copying and selling someone else's work. I
certainly wouldn't respect myself. If we would like to see origami treated
as an art, I think we need to break away from the "paint by numbers" mold
and develop some ethics BEYOND the copyright law.

The problem is that many of us have become origami consumers. It is an
addiction, yes? Most of us learn to fold from all the wonderful books and
have an ever-ending appetite for more wonderful models. We have a habit of
pulling out the latest diagram and stepping through the instructions
without really thinking about what we're doing. When you sit down to fold,
it is easy to pick a book of the shelf and pick a new model to try. The
real challenge is to put away the diagrams sometimes and try to use what
you learn to make something of your own. To progress as folders, I think we
all need to take this second step and not get stuck in the books. (And
perhaps we need more books along the lines of J.C. Nolan's "Creating
Origami" for encouragement.)

Sure enjoy the diagrams. They are one way to appreciate the work of other
folders, but try to appreciate seeing great models without the
ever-constant thought, "Gee, is it diagrammed?"

And yes, I'm definitely a consumer too, but I'm trying to go on a diet :->.

pat slider.





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 20:01:24 +0100
Subject: Re: Origami Magazines?

Susan Johnston <supersuzy2000@HOTMAIL.COM> sez

>I was just wondering, whether there are any origami magazines sold in
>ENGLAND apart from the ones from the different origami societies.  (By this
>I mean ones sold in newsagents etc)  Thanks.

You're kidding! We have 600 odd members (Penny will correct me) & many
of those are overseas. If the publications industry thought there was a
market for ori mags in Britain, we'd have them in WH Smiths.

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda syphons!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos





From: Rachel Katz <mandrk@MAIL.PB.NET>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 21:20:44 +0000
Subject: Origami-l membersat the convention

> Is there a way for O-List members to idendtify each other at Convention
> (other than recognising names on the name tags)  ie a symbol on the name
> tags?????
>

If OUSA convention goers from this list would like, I've got hundreds of little
round tropical fish stickers (Okay, they're not origami). I'll have them at
registration and at the information table in the hospitality area. Just request
one to stick on to your badge and we'll be able to recognize other origami-L
members.

Rachel Katz
Origami - it's not just for squares!





From: Kenny1414@AOL.COM
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 21:37:56 -0400 (
Subject: Re: Sv:      Re: Realistic flying origami helicopter?

In a message dated 99-06-10 18:09:25 EDT,
_Roberto Morassi_ wrote:

> The kiwi FRUIT, however, has NO wings at all. Not even beak, legs or tail.
>  A very sad thing.

Not sad at all. Just like a Kiwi egg, and that, surely, is a joy to
contemplate.

Aloha,
Kenneth M. Kawamura
kenny1414@aol.com





From: "Jerry D. Harris" <102354.2222@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 22:57:20 -0400
Subject: Complex Frog Base Model

Hi All -

        I'm giving a presentation on origami this coming Thursday, and as
part of the talk, I intend to show some of the common basic fold ("kite"
base, fish base, bird base, and frog base) along with the traditional
models folded from each one.  To contrast with each, I'd like to show a
very complex model that begins with each base.  I've got good models for
the fish and bird bases, but I can't find an adequately complex model that
begins with the frog base.  All suggestions are welcome!  Thanks in
advance...

 _,_
 ____/_\,) .. _
--____-===( _\/ \\/ \-----_---__
 /\ ' ^__/>/\____\--------
__________/__\_ ____________________________.//__.//_________

 Jerry D. Harris
 Fossil Preparation Lab
 New Mexico Museum of Natural History
 1801 Mountain Rd NW
 Albuquerque NM 87104-1375
 Phone: (505) 899-2809
 Fax: (505) 841-2866
 102354.2222@compuserve.com





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 00:49:04 -0400
Subject: Re: AY's butterlfies ( or whoever's)

At 11:55 AM 6/10/99 +0100, Nick Robinson sez ;-)

>If you won an expensive prize performing someone else's song, the composer
>might reasonably expect a cut.

Okay, but we are still speaking of origami. As for a similarity _in origami_:
I have the OUSA Origami By Children entry from here in front of me, which
allows participants applying with other creator's models as well (crediting
the creatos, of course), not only applying with their own creations. If
your work is elected for the cross-country exhibition, you get one year
membership. So there's exhibition and there are prizes. And there is no
problem (and I agree with that)! So why would Origami Sverige's butterfly
competition be sooooooo different from OBC? Yes, the first prize is a
travel to the 2nd SOM. But I think this is fantastic and not a thing that
should prevent the bulk of folders to partake in the competition. Why
should we discriminate people in a _folding_ competition because they are
not the _creators_ of the models _they had folded_? (The creators will be
credited on the card at the exhibition, of course - as well as the folders.)

Happy folding!

Peter Budai





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 00:49:07 -0400
Subject: Re: AY's butterflies ( or whoever's)

Joseph Wu wrote

>Yoshizawa is one of the greats of origami.

Yes, no doubt.

>It is well known that he is rather closed about sharing his models.

Yes, but don't the models he has published in books count as "shared"? I
think they do, and thus, why shouldn't somebody fold them for a
competition, no matter whether the prize be a chewing gum or a trip to Sweden?

>So what does he require? Respect.

Isn't it respect if someone choses his model to partake in a competition
(except if the competition would be called "The Worst of Origami", but now
it is NOT the case, as we all now - I just wanted to be exact - )?

>If we want to continue enjoying what Yoshizawa has to offer, knowing that
he's >already holding so much back because of perceived lack of respect,

Without being unrespectful to Yoshizawa, I think the reasons behind his
protective behaviour might include some misunderstanding and feeling
offended as well. This is his reaction for things that happen with all of
us. But we are all different people and we react differently. That's why he
reacts one way, and another another way.

Well, happy folding others' or your own creations!

Peter Budai





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 00:49:11 -0400
Subject: Apple flight!

At 11:04 PM 6/10/99 -0700, you wrote:
>And at the equator ..........???????????

There are very few apples... ;-)

Peter Budai





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 00:49:14 -0400
Subject: Re: AY's butterlfies ( or whoever's)

At 09:10 AM 6/11/99 +0100, you wrote:

>..."but  apart from origami, he is a mere human being"...
>
>Isn't that the whole point? He has created these models that I, another
>human being, could not.
>
>For Example. If I were to write a library for .... and sold it .... to be
paid >a royalty on each program which uses it. These clauses exist and are
honoured >properly, and it is exactly the same situation with A.Y. and his
origami.

Well, I haven't seen (and I hope not to see) any origami creator creating
to receive money each time someone else folds his models...
Of course, the creator gets some money for his books, but that's only one
time, like when you buy a license.

Happy and royalty-free folding!

Peter Budai





From: Kenny1414@AOL.COM
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 01:56:30 -0400 (
Subject: (NO) Butterflies are not free! (was Re: AY's butterlfies ( or

Aloha "Ariel" et al,

In a message dated 99-06-11 03:39:18 EDT, "Ariel" writes:
    8< snip >8
> Finally, and once again, the goal of my email was questioning up to what
>  extent can he (or for the case, any other) prevent, say, Jan, from selling
>  butterflies.
    8< snip >8

(Please forgive my use of metaphorical scissors.)

Practically, it depends on how much s/he's willing to spend on a
good lawyer, and how lucky s/he gets in a court of law. However,
I would not wish things to go anywhere in that direction.

I'm going to put my two cents in here. Apologies for the length.

At the risk of offending someone, I'd like to suggest. that this
question has no good answer, except age and experience, maybe.

I think, if you consider it carefully, you will recognize
at the heart of it, the classic child's question:

    "Who's going to make me?".

At the age when this question first appears, there is
no good answer, since not all the concepts of self,
other person, consequence, harm, the Golden Rule,
respect, politeness, honor, ethics, morals, law, right,
duty, property, intellectual property, reciprocity,
solidarity, unintentional consequences, etc.
still have to be learned.

(At least, I am still trying to learn them. _sigh_.)

It takes time, and experience to realize that this is
the wrong question to ask. I'm still not sure what the
right question is.

For now, it is enough for me that I know I should ask
for permission to use another's fold. If, thru laziness,
or my own incompetence, I don't, then I accept that it
is my failing, and hope the consequences won't be
too bad.

(By incompetence, I mean, for example: I don't
remember who the author is; or I don't know how to
contact the author; or there isn't time, or I am mistaken,
and in any case I make a choice to use the fold without
permission.)

I think young/immature/all folders, tend to mature/_rise thru
levels of understanding/learning_, from "What's that?", thru
"Can I have that?", "Can you show me that?", "I can do that.",
"I made this, I can give this away.", "I made this, I can sell this.",
"I can't sell this?", "Who's going to stop me?",
"Why should I stop?", "Why should I care?",
"What should I do?", "What would you like me to do?",
"What do I want to do?", "What do I choose to do?",
and finally "I am doing this, here and now."

By custom and "common sense", we make allowances
for "children", whose simple, innocent behaviour can be
considered "cute"; but innocence is only a mitigating factor,
not a perfect defense.

I think, in Buddhist terms, not intending any harm,
means you aren't committing a sin, but you may still be
harming someone.

In Roman Catholic terms, you may be guilty of being
"the near occasion of Sin", or something like that.

When I didn't know any better, I sold origami (a little,
but still ...), and I copied diagrams from books, and even
sent copies to and received copies from others, without
thinking.

Now, I know better. This doesn't mean I don't do these
things any more. It does mean I think about it before I
choose whether or not to do it.

I have no idea what the legal "fair use" actually means.
I try for my own "good use", and hope for the best.
Where I know the author objects, I prefer to respect
the author's wishes.

When it comes, specifically, to copying diagrams
out of books, or folding somehing for someone for a fee,
if I do it, I do it (feeling guilty) as an agent for the
requestor, as an alternative to making them come to
my house, use my copy of a book, and make copies
or notes or fold by hand. (Incidentally, as a collector,
I do grieve at the wear and tear on the book. _sigh_)

I know, I know, I'm being wishy-washy about it, sorry.
Hope at least some of this made sense to/for you.

Suggest that, before continuing the thread, you think
carefully about how you look to your readers, some of
whom, I've seen, are a lot more mature than I am.
(I'm growing old, but still not growing up.)

Aloha,
Kenneth M. Kawamura

"There never was a Bo tree,
nor bright mirror standing.
With Nothing Nowhere,
what is the dust to cling to?"
  -- knockout response/punchline
     from a Zen poetry combat/contest story
(from my memory, so may be a little distorted.
The original is not in English anyway.)





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 08:12:51 +0100
Subject: closed backs...

Ronald Koh <ronkoh@SINGNET.COM.SG> sez

>get info on Montroll's closed back concept

It's no mystery, you basically make his designs inside out & voila! The
back is closed! Seriously, closed backs represent a design challenge
taken up in the 80's by Brill, Hulme etc & more recently by Robert Lang.
John adopted this "restriction" more recently.

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda syphons!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos
