# Modern Arnis Curriculum as Intellectual Property



## Guro Harold (Jun 24, 2006)

If the Modern Arnis Curriculum can be thought of as Intellectual Property:

What concepts are unique and significant contributions of the Professor as compared to other FMAs?   
How did you obtain the current MA curriculum that you teach/practice?   
Who owns the rights to the Modern Arnis curriculum?


----------



## PeteNerd (Jun 24, 2006)

Palusut said:
			
		

> If the Modern Arnis Curriculum can be thought of as Intellectual Property:
> What concepts are unique and significant contributions of the Professor as compared to other FMAs?
> How did you obtain the current MA curriculum that you teach/practice?
> Who owns the rights to the Modern Arnis curriculum?



The curriculum cannot be copyrighted.  The moves cannot be copyrighted.  A video of a performance or a book or a manual containing the curriculum can be.

This link sums it up nicely.
http://www.masters.edu/DeptPageNew.asp?PageID=1736

*What cannot be protected by copyright?*
​According to section 102 of Title 17 copyright protection does not extend to ideas, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles, or discoveries, regardless of the form in which they are described, explained, illustrated, or embodied.


In other words facts, ideas and slogans cannot be copyrighted; only the _expression_ of ideas.  A live performance such as a lecture or a sermon or a concert cannot be copyrighted.  The video tape or audio tape of the concert is copyrighted as is a transcript of a lecture or sermon.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jun 24, 2006)

True, but a few other systems have put their curriculum's under copyright, a few flavors of Kenpo come to mind.


----------



## crushing (Jun 24, 2006)

This reminds me of the Bikram Yoga copyright and subsequent lawsuits.  The article linked below is from 2004, I don't know if anything has come of it yet.  I'm no lawyer, but seems like copyright rulings that are applied to yoga programs may also be applied MA programs.

Yogis go to court over poses Copyright dispute turns yoga into a legal exercise


----------



## Cruentus (Jun 24, 2006)

Bob Hubbard said:
			
		

> True, but a few other systems have put their curriculum's under copyright, a few flavors of Kenpo come to mind.


 
Some Korean styles are very serious about that sort of thing too.

From my arm-chair attorney standpoint (in other words, no I am not an attorney), I understood it that a curriculum could be copywritten in format. So, if I went to someones website, printed their curriculim, and distributed it without the said entities permission, I would be in violation. If I took all of the same techniques and concepts and progressions of such and taught them at my school under a different format (say changed the names of things and didn't use the printed copywritten format) then I wouldn't be in violation.

So, basically, that is my uneducated way of saying, "I agree with PeteNerd, and I like his link." 

Paul


----------



## Cruentus (Jun 24, 2006)

crushing said:
			
		

> This reminds me of the Bikram Yoga copyright and subsequent lawsuits. The article linked below is from 2004, I don't know if anything has come of it yet. I'm no lawyer, but seems like copyright rulings that are applied to yoga programs may also be applied MA programs.
> 
> Yogis go to court over poses Copyright dispute turns yoga into a legal exercise


 
Good example. Important too mention, what the law actually says doesn't deter people (usually morons) from trying to sue anyways. Often, however, legal interpretations are changed through rulings. I don't think that the copywrite laws will change in favor of people trying to sue because "soandso stole my art," though. 

But, that won't stop certain groups with a lot of money and time from paying for attorneys to drag someone through a lawsuit; costing time and money for the accused "copywrite infringer."

Paul


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 20, 2006)

Tulisan said:
			
		

> Some Korean styles are very serious about that sort of thing too.
> 
> From my arm-chair attorney standpoint (in other words, no I am not an attorney), I understood it that a curriculum could be copywritten in format. So, if I went to someones website, printed their curriculim, and distributed it without the said entities permission, I would be in violation. If I took all of the same techniques and concepts and progressions of such and taught them at my school under a different format (say changed the names of things and didn't use the printed copywritten format) then I wouldn't be in violation.
> 
> ...


 
This is how I believe the law see's it but it is definately a shade of grey and anyone and everyone can sue each other in our society!  Unfortuantely!

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com


----------

