Re -collecting info on e.o. injuries

[Guest guest]

> maybe you have not looked lately but there is more than one White Paper out

now; I have recently published 2 articles on what works for scoliosis and why

RDT does not and is dangerous, but not being a member you would not have gotten

the e-journals or notice. (.....just found out the naha site update is behind

due to the move of home office to NC, there is a backlog of web work waiting to

be put up, which clears a lot of confusion earlier- the site is being worked on

now, hopefully that paper will be up soon)<

 

It is all well and good that members are sharing information with other members,

but that is pretty much preaching to the choir. The NAHA members are not the

audience that needs to be warned about Young Living!

 

As for the website not being updated, sorry, I am a web designer by profession

and I can tell you that changes such as you described would take me about an

hour. AT MOST!

 

And the NAHA website is just one method for communicating things like this to

the general public. When is the last time anything about the dangers of Raindrop

Therapy appeared in a national magazine? Has it EVER?

 

> Press releases go out all the time!!! several a week in fact on all sorts of

happenings, and this information on the collection of injuries has gone out long

ago- but of course not being a member you wouldnt get them.<

 

That's the point. Communicating with " the membership " is a given, Press

Releases are supposed to go outside the membership, to new vetting sources. To

" the Press " . Not to members.

 

> FEEL FREE TO WRITE ONE- anyone can put articles out, so instead of whining, do

something Sue, you have an amazing talent for writing, go for it! <

 

First, thanks for the compliment but I must not be that good a writer if it

comes across as whining instead of constructive criticism.

 

And an article from me, a hobbiest at best, with no credentials, is unlikely to

be published. There are by contrast, qualified people who could be writing

articles but who are not.

 

I did used to work for the Editor of Body and Soul magazine, back when she was

the Editor for The Herb Quarterly magazine, if you'd like me to introduce

someone to her.

 

I understand your defensive tone Sylla, but don't shoot the messenger.

[Guest guest]

Sue said: >>>Press releases should be sent out saying that NAHA is

collecting information on injuries, press releases should be sent out with

updates on the quantity of reports, press releases should be sent out saying

this student is working on a report, then of course press releases should be

sent out once the actual report is done. >>

 

Sylla replied: Press releases go out all the time!!! several a week in

fact on all sorts of happenings, and this information on the collection of

injuries has gone out long ago- but of course not being a member you wouldnt

get them. Sometimes I put them on here, the collection release came out

over a year ago here...

 

 

 

Sylla, 'press' releases are intended to go to the media, to the public, they

are not intended only for members. Information to members comes through

newsletters, bulletins and distribution of Minutes and committee reports.

An appropriate place for a press release by email would most certainly be

here on this list. I do not recall seeing anything here, however, doesn't

mean you didn't post something. I'm talking about official press releases,

however. This list and others dedicated to a greater community discussion

about aromatherapy is certainly where any aromatherapy organization should

send press releases. The other public place to disseminate information is

the organization's website. This is the face of the organization seen by

the public and anyone interested in becoming a member or supporting the

organization.

 

You asked me to clarify a comment I made earlier about NAHA not legally

operating under their own bylaws, therefore being in violation of their

501©3. Like Butch, I don't want to have to reiterate all that was said

back in 1995. I'll try to make this as simple as possible, interjecting

nonprofit 101 for those who aren't familiar. The bylaws of any nonprofit

organization are the governing structure and outline how the organization

will conduct its affairs. Adherence to the rules established in the bylaws

is what garners initial as well as ongoing nonprofit approval by the federal

government through the reporting apparatus established that periodically

examines the organization's activities. Being awarded nonprofit status

means, in the larger sense, that you are creating an entity that has no

private ownership. It means that you are creating something that is

stewarded by members in the public trust and for the public benefit. IOW,

you are committing to operate within your stated mission and bylaws

operating structure, iow, what you told the IRS you were going to do as a

nonprofit. Inherent in the rules is a requirement for transparency and

openness to assure the public that your nonprofit status is taken seriously

and leaders appointed or elected have the responsibility to insure that the

ongoing conduct is above reproach and not abused, especially for personal

gain. One of the concerns in 1995 was the state of financial affairs during

Cheryl Hoard's reign as president and lack of proper accounting for monies

held in trust by then outgoing president Jeanne Rose and set aside for a

specific purpose. The reason this happened was that NAHA failed (under

president Cheryl Hoard) to insure that the position of Treasurer was filled

by a competent person to insure any safeguards or distribution and accurate

accounting of funds. Christoph Streicher was then appointed Treasurer under

Jade Shutes and he did absolutely nothing to account for the discrepancies,

nor did he establish a sound accounting process for the future. Christoph

was derelict in his duties and in spite of many challenges in this regard

simply chose to do nothing. Then president, Jade Shutes, allowed this. There

has not been a competent person (or even another incompetent one) in the

position of Treasurer at NAHA for as long as I can remember. This failure is

still affecting how NAHA operates and most certainly how it is perceived by

the public.

 

There are other recognizable deteriorating indicators on the website. Other

key board positions are vacant. Regional and state director positions are

vacant across the country. There are two sets of bylaws on the website, one

a proposed set that was supposed to be voted on by members and in place long

before now. The have been no financial or committee reports to show that any

activities are actually vibrant and in place. IOW, it looks as if the

organization is dead.

 

The immediate past president, Michele Miller, is required to serve as a

board member, according to the bylaws. This is extremely important to the

good functioning of any organization to insure continuity of program goals.

It appears as if she is not. She now operates a website with aromatherapy

training with scant information about the courses and absolutely no

information about the educators, their training or credentials.

http://www.gileadinc.com/index.html Additionally, this school is not

approved by NAHA. Take a look at the website and tell me if it doesn't

raise your eyebrows if you know that the owner of the site is the immediate

past president of NAHA. The website is shrouded in secrecy. Why?

 

It appears to me that things are NOT improving, in spite of what you say,

Sylla. Until someone steps in and makes NAHA a competent nonprofit

organization, all the little successes you might see are meaningless. It

appears (certainly based on comments here) that they are now creating more

discomfort than good works in the public eye. I personally think that they

should dissolve and hand over assets to another nonprofit if they can't

after all these years get their act together. AIA is being benevolent and

accepting NAHA (and ARC) as sister organizations. I wonder if this is in

their best interests or will ultimately bring failure to them as well.

 

Be Well,

Marcia Elston, Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence

http://www.wingedseed.com

http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com

http://www.aromaconnection.org

" We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give. " - Winston

Churchill

[Guest guest]

Sorry Sue, no disrespect meant! I just don't have all the answers for all the

issues, but I do know that all of naha is volunteer, there are no paid salaries.

The web backlog is something I cannot address, and I have no idea where the PRs

go, I just know it goes to more than the members. Once the site is updated

perhaps we can explore more issues together, but for now I will let it rest..

 

on the RDT issue, as far as I know no article has appeared in a national mag,

just not sensational enough I guess. I dont have time for this anymore, my last

stab was a paper with Tony presented at several conferences on " undiluted use,

are we in denial " aimed at spa industry; so this paper is in conference

proceedings and has been sent around. Anyone can take that paper on the naha

site http://www.naha.org/articles/aromatherapy%20undiluted.htm link or pass it

on and see if anyone wants to publish a short version, the best part is the end

of the paper and summary. In 2006 I did check with insurance companies that are

said to cover RDT- the AMTA, AMBT and FL own FSMTA insurer. None of them would

cover any injuries if they were to happen because of negligence, but they do not

want to say it is not covered, they just give blanket coverage. So it may take a

few lawsuits for folks to take it up.

 

will try to get the scoliosis paper up here eventually if you all would be

interested. But yes any connections you have that may be interested send them

the link and anyone wishing to carry on and write more papers would have our

blessings. Anyone can write for the mags, one doesn't have to be a star!.

 

I just lost my steam over it all, went onto other things like charities!

 

Syl

 

ps. just heard Jim made it to Kuwait, balmy 60 degrees he says!! waiting for

lift out in next few days back to AFG....

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>Anyone can take that paper on the naha site

http://www.naha.org/articles/aromatherapy%20undiluted.htm link or pass it on

and see if anyone wants to publish a short version, the best part is the end of

the paper and summary.<

 

Not trying to be rude...but what exactly do you think " Copyright " means?

 

The article is copyright protected...

 

" Tony Burfield and Sylla Sheppard-Hanger (2005) "

 

which means legally we CANNOT take it and pass it on without breaking the law,

Sylla!!

 

If NAHA WANTED this information to be available to " take and pass around " then

they would not have it legally protected from doing so!

 

Frustrated, Sue

[Guest guest]

________________________________

 

ATFE [ATFE ] On Behalf Of SUSAN

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 6:44 PM

ATFE

Re: Re -collecting info on e.o. injuries

 

 

 

 

>Anyone can take that paper on the naha site

http://www.naha.org/articles/aromatherapy%20undiluted.htm

<http://www.naha.org/articles/aromatherapy%20undiluted.htm> link or pass it

on and see if anyone wants to publish a short version, the best part is the

end of the paper and summary.<

 

Not trying to be rude...but what exactly do you think " Copyright " means?

 

The article is copyright protected...

 

" Copyright C Tony Burfield and Sylla Sheppard-Hanger (2005) " >

 

Sue, Tony and Sylla own the copyright, not NAHA. They can give permission to

reprint anywhere they want.

 

Be Well,

Marcia Elston, Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence

http://www.wingedseed.com

http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com

http://www.aromaconnection.org

" We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give. " - Winston

Churchill

[Guest guest]

Last email got sent too soon . . .here are specifics

http://www.naha.org/copy.htm The copyright on the front page of the NAHA

site may appear to apply to all papers, however, if the papers have been

originally printed elsewhere, as this one has, I doubt NAHA's copyright

would prevail. I cannot imagine that either Sylla or Tony gave up their

exclusive copyright to materials written by themselves to NAHA. Syl?

 

This would be a good paper, especially if updated, to get more visible out

there.

 

Be Well,

Marcia Elston, Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence

http://www.wingedseed.com <http://www.wingedseed.com/>

http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com <http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com/>

http://www.aromaconnection.org <http://www.aromaconnection.org/>

" We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give. " - Winston

Churchill

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sue wrote:

The article is copyright protected... " Tony Burfield and Sylla

Sheppard-Hanger (2005) "

 

But Sylla herself is giving permission and common courtesy would ensure the

copyright tagline (and proper authorship) would continue forward. Would it

require the permission of Tony as well to be able to utilize Sylla's invitation

to spread the word?

 

I'm asking literally, not being snitty (I've been in a snitty mood today so

wanted to make sure it wasn't sneaking into correspondence unintentionally).

 

Appreciative of these continued discourses!

Jessica, NC

Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

[Guest guest]

Hi,

 

I may be wrong but i thought that as long as you reference an article correctly

that this is enough. I thought that copywrite is to stop people from passing

other peoples work on as their own i.e. plagerism? Otherwise you would have to

ask for permission from all the people you quote in an article/essay etc which

could be hundreds in the case of a thesis or long essay- and incidently it is

not a requirement in academic work. As long as you state that the article is

written by so and so then that is sufficient. Or am I getting it completely

wrong?

Rebecca

 

ATFE , familymassage wrote:

>

> Sue wrote:

> The article is copyright protected... " Tony Burfield and Sylla

Sheppard-Hanger (2005) "

>

> But Sylla herself is giving permission and common courtesy would ensure the

copyright tagline (and proper authorship) would continue forward. Would it

require the permission of Tony as well to be able to utilize Sylla's invitation

to spread the word?

>

> I'm asking literally, not being snitty (I've been in a snitty mood today so

wanted to make sure it wasn't sneaking into correspondence unintentionally).

>

> Appreciative of these continued discourses!

> Jessica, NC

> Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks Rebecca- this is what I referred to, not to copy as your own, to

reference or link to this article.

 

Even being a few years old now it is still right on about undiluted use....so go

ahead and link to it, or write Tony for permission, you have mine, excerpt from

it or point to it, nothing illegal, heck even if you want to copy and put your

name on it just change 20% and its legal

 

Sylla

 

-

bespecticler

ATFE

Thursday, February 11, 2010 3:18 AM

Re: Re -collecting info on e.o. injuries

 

 

 

Hi,

 

I may be wrong but i thought that as long as you reference an article

correctly that this is enough. I thought that copywrite is to stop people from

passing other peoples work on as their own i.e. plagerism? Otherwise you would

have to ask for permission from all the people you quote in an article/essay etc

which could be hundreds in the case of a thesis or long essay- and incidently it

is not a requirement in academic work. As long as you state that the article is

written by so and so then that is sufficient. Or am I getting it completely

wrong?

Rebecca

 

ATFE , familymassage wrote:

>

> Sue wrote:

> The article is copyright protected... " Tony Burfield and Sylla

Sheppard-Hanger (2005) "

>

> But Sylla herself is giving permission and common courtesy would ensure the

copyright tagline (and proper authorship) would continue forward. Would it

require the permission of Tony as well to be able to utilize Sylla's invitation

to spread the word?

>

> I'm asking literally, not being snitty (I've been in a snitty mood today so

wanted to make sure it wasn't sneaking into correspondence unintentionally).

>

> Appreciative of these continued discourses!

> Jessica, NC

> Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

ATFE [ATFE ] On Behalf Of

bespecticler

Thursday, February 11, 2010 12:18 AM

ATFE

Re: Re -collecting info on e.o. injuries

 

Hi,

 

I may be wrong but i thought that as long as you reference an article

correctly that this is enough. I thought that copywrite is to stop people

from passing other peoples work on as their own i.e. plagerism? Otherwise

you would have to ask for permission from all the people you quote in an

article/essay etc which could be hundreds in the case of a thesis or long

essay- and incidently it is not a requirement in academic work. As long as

you state that the article is written by so and so then that is sufficient.

Or am I getting it completely wrong?

Rebecca

 

Hi Rebecca,

 

You can only copy or quote a certain percentage of the text of anyone's

copyrighted work. The laws are under 'fair use' for purposes of education.

I'm not certain the percentage off the top of my head but the laws that

cover copyright ownership have been gradually expanded over time and now

include uses of the work such as dramatization, translations, and derivative

works such as adaptations and transformations. We have several authors that

write for aromaconnection and we obtain permission from all of them to

completely reprint their articles. Even when they are specifically written

for aromaconnection, contributing authors retain their own copyright. If

you work for a major publication, say NY Times or Wall Street Journal, you

are generally obligated under the terms of your contract to assign copyright

to the publication. So, in this instance, both Sylla and Tony own the

copyright and they can give permission to anyone to reprint the article and

have not assigned it to NAHA. You will note that there is either no

copyright notice on many other articles there, which intimates they were

written by NAHA staff or executives, or there were no individual copyright

rights established, so NAHA is perhaps claiming copyright to these with

their overall copyright notice that I linked to previously.

 

Be Well,

Marcia Elston, Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence

http://www.wingedseed.com

http://www.wingedseed.blogspot.com

http://www.aromaconnection.org

" We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give. " - Winston

Churchill

[Guest guest]

Otherwise you would have to ask for permission from all the people you quote

in an article/essay etc which could be hundreds in the case of a thesis or

long essay- and incidently it is not a requirement in academic work. As

long as you state that the article is written by so and so then that is

sufficient. Or am I getting it completely wrong?

Rebecca

 

Hi Rebecca,

There is a difference between sharing a complete article (see my previous

response) and quoting pieces of an article. What you are speaking of above

is referencing or quoting portions of an article in another article/essay.

In such a case, one is required to properly cite the source of the quote or

information but it is not necessary to request permission from the copyright

holder to do so...otherwise, as you state, one would be guilty of plagerism,

not copyright infringement.

 

Tina

[Guest guest]

>heck even if you want to copy and put your name on it just change 20% and its

legal<

 

As an artist and a web designer by profession, I take copyright issues very

seriously.

 

It is NOT legal to take someones work, change 20% of it, and put your own name

on it as your original work.

 

If NAHA, or Sylla, or Tony was willing to have this article shared, there are

very simple ways to accomplish that.

 

They simply remove the copyright protection. That's pretty damn simple. Then

anyone who wanted to share the information in whole or in part, could, legally.

 

Then, if they wanted to actually encourage, not just allow, it to be

shared...that is also simple, and what zillions of other organizations and

individuals who care about getting their message out, do to encourage sharing of

articles.

 

There is simple code that can be added to a website so people can easily SHARE

the article on DIGG, MySpace, Google, Delicious, Live, Facebook, email, Twitter,

WordPress, TypePad and hundreds of other bookmarking, bloggin and sharing

programs.

 

Or lets say they wanted to maintain their copyright but allow " Fair Use " (which

is taking a small excerpt and giving credit), they could do something like the

Organic Consumers and many others do...have a clear Fair Use statement.

 

Here is a copy of the Fair Use notice on the Organic Consumers website:

 

" Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and

informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has

not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made

available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific,

environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc. It is

believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as

provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17

U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to

those who have an interest in using the included information for research and

educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for

purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from

the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or

technical advice. "

[Guest guest]

>excerpt from it or point to it, nothing illegal, heck even if you want to copy

and put your name on it just change 20% and its legal<

 

" There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken

without permission.

 

Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for

obtaining permission. "

 

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

 

" Under the fair use doctrine of the U.S. copyright statute, it is permissible to

use limited portions of a work including quotes, for purposes such as

commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports. "

 

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-fairuse.html

 

So a quote here, a quote there, is OK. Copying a large portion, not.