Decisions

[Flying Crane]

I see...let me clarify.

You cant trademark a specific individual technique such as a certain kick or block or punch due to the lack of originality.

You can trademark a specific curriculum of combinations of techniques for specific responses.

So you cant copy the 60 specific responses that they have published....but you can teach the individual techniques and your own curriculum of how to apply them.

The problem is, this body of techniques has been in existence for decades, and thousands of people have been taught the system and elevated to instructor status. Ed Parker passed away in 1990. It wasn’t until just a few years ago (I don’t remember specifically when) that his daughter and son-in-law decided to trademark everything and demanded licensing fees on the use of the crests and her father’s name and image and I believe the curriculum. So now they are making an attempt to collect fees from everyone who teaches her fathers system, many of whom have been doing so since before she was born.

So I call BS on that one.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

The problem is, this body of techniques has been in existence for decades, and thousands of people have been taught the system and elevated to instructor status. Ed Parker passed away in 1990. It wasn’t until just a few years ago (I don’t remember specifically when) that his daughter and son-in-law decided to trademark everything and demanded licensing fees on the use of the crests and her father’s name and image and I believe the curriculum. So now they are making an attempt to collect fees from everyone who teaches her fathers system, many of whom have been doing so since before she was born.

So I call BS on that one.

I agree, it's BS. Doesn't change what they're trying to do. And other heads of styles are following suit.

 

[Flying Crane]

I agree, it's BS. Doesn't change what they're trying to do. And other heads of styles are following suit.

I don’t really know much about it, and don’t know who is getting in line with them. My kenpo lineage was Tracy, and I no longer practice it. So this isn’t my issue at all.

I believe the problem is pretty easy to avoid. Just don’t call your stuff “American Kenpo” or “Ed Parker’s American Kenpo” or any such similar stuff. Instead, as has been noted already, you call it “Kenpo” and you simply state your lineage. A true fact such as lineage cannot be forbidden. If you were a student of Ed Parker, or a student of a student of a student of... Ed Parker, nobody can tell you to never say that. So for example you could simply say “I teach Kenpo as I understand it, as I learned it from my teacher who was a student of Ed Parker” and I think you would have a defensible position. Hell, you could skip the name Ed Parker altogether and simply say “I am 6th generation downstream from William Chow”.

The problem is, people sue you and hope the fear and the expense of a legal defense will intimidate you into just folding. They don’t want an expensive fight either, and if they lose the fight it would set precedent for others to fight them as well. Their house of cards will crumble and they know it. So they try to get people to step in line with cease-and-desist letters and threats of law suits.

 

[skribs]

Make 60 similar step-drills and make it your own.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Make 60 similar step-drills and make it your own.

Thats actually happened a few times. Its my theory on why there are so many different styles

 

[marques]

following my thread about the disappointing grading I've been thinking a lot about the state of kenpo and looking around online and realise there is so much crap out there with people being given high ranks who are rubbish and its polluting the art bringing down its reputation. When I started training kenpo was considered extremely tough with hard technique lines brutal gradings and fitness tests and hard sparring. Now it's extremely watered down with a lot of instructors focusing more on theoretical than practical and it's making people think it's useless. I still believe kenpo as it should be taught is one of the best systems for self defence.

I've talked to a few friends of mine who agree with what I'm saying and one of them suggested we start our own club and make it old school training. Making people actually have to work for their belts, testing techniques against resistance and doing hard fitness workouts and sparring multiple opponents. I like the Idea of bringing back the intensity to kenpo but I'm also not sure.

For one there's no market especially for adults. Karate isn't as big as it was and it would be hard to sustain a club in our area. Second there's all the bs rights going on In kenpo. Apparently I'd have to pay a hell of a lot of money to even hang one of my certificates in my own school because it has a logo on it. And I'm to old to be dealing with crap like that. A while back I had a little training group going. Not a school just an informal training session and it was good. It had to stop when I moved away but i don't know.

It just really saddens me that Kenpo at least in my area has completely fallen in quality. It's a style I love and though I train in other systems kenpo will always be my base and I would love to bring back some of the old intensity that isn't seen much anymore in the style.

It is the same everywhere to the point I lost the will to train.

Combat sports still have the tough side and hard tests, but they are ‘just’ sports. The Judo class I assisted last week was very much about what scores points, or doesn’t (and only one adult, excluding the instructors).

 

[Flying Crane]

Make 60 similar step-drills and make it your own.

Many years ago when I was still “kind of” a kenpo guy I actually did this in a way.

The problem is, you are limited by your own experience and quite likely will have problems in what you develop. The system overall may not be very viable.

In my case, I took the Tracy curriculum, which is actually much larger than the other Parker kenpo lineages ( I prefer to refer to them as “lineages” rather than as “Ed Parker’s American Kenpo” because I think that reflects the truth a lot better, as the Tracy brothers were student of Parker in the early days, who split and established their own lineage, and the Parker Kenpo folks are also people who trained under Ed Parker at different times, and continue to teach what they learned) and made some serious modifications. I eliminated a lot of stuff that seemed repetitive and nearly identical to other stuff, eliminated a bunch of stuff that just seemed like bad and dysfunctional ideas (there are a lot of those, in my opinion) and re-wrote some that I felt had potential but needed to be tweaked. The result was kind of interesting, but overall I didn’t have a lot of faith in it as I was just doing it on my own, wasn’t training with anyone, didn’t have a group or teacher with whom to work it through.

Inventing a method on your own is difficult, you need to really experiment with that stuff to feel confident that it is sound and functional. That is actually my main disillusionment with the kenpo that I trained and the kenpo that I’ve seen: I feel that a lot of those self defense techniques are filled with bad ideas that would never work. The argument is that they aren’t meant to work directly, in a “problem/solution” sort of way. Rather, they are meant to give ideas of possibilities, and parts of different SD techs can be mixed and grafted together to fit a unique situation. While this is true in theory, I find it to be a very clumsy approach in organizing a curriculum, and the plethora of bad ideas just undermines the whole approach. For me, I finally decided that kenpo is not a good match and i need to do something else.

 

[skribs]

Many years ago when I was still “kind of” a kenpo guy I actually did this in a way.

The problem is, you are limited by your own experience and quite likely will have problems in what you develop. The system overall may not be very viable.

In my case, I took the Tracy curriculum, which is actually much larger than the other Parker kenpo lineages ( I prefer to refer to them as “lineages” rather than as “Ed Parker’s American Kenpo” because I think that reflects the truth a lot better, as the Tracy brothers were student of Parker in the early days, who split and established their own lineage, and the Parker Kenpo folks are also people who trained under Ed Parker at different times, and continue to teach what they learned) and made some serious modifications. I eliminated a lot of stuff that seemed repetitive and nearly identical to other stuff, eliminated a bunch of stuff that just seemed like bad and dysfunctional ideas (there are a lot of those, in my opinion) and re-wrote some that I felt had potential but needed to be tweaked. The result was kind of interesting, but overall I didn’t have a lot of faith in it as I was just doing it on my own, wasn’t training with anyone, didn’t have a group or teacher with whom to work it through.

Inventing a method on your own is difficult, you need to really experiment with that stuff to feel confident that it is sound and functional. That is actually my main disillusionment with the kenpo that I trained and the kenpo that I’ve seen: I feel that a lot of those self defense techniques are filled with bad ideas that would never work. The argument is that they aren’t meant to work directly, in a “problem/solution” sort of way. Rather, they are meant to give ideas of possibilities, and parts of different SD techs can be mixed and grafted together to fit a unique situation. While this is true in theory, I find it to be a very clumsy approach in organizing a curriculum, and the plethora of bad ideas just undermines the whole approach. For me, I finally decided that kenpo is not a good match and i need to do something else.

It depends on how its done. I once had a white belt Taekwondo student come up to me and complain that she wasn't able to practice her hand grabs on her son, who is a black belt. He knew what she was going to do and applied all his strength against that motion. She said she wasn't sure she was doing it right if she couldn't use it on him.

I explained to her that she wouldn't be able to. What she would do, if she knew more techniques, is to go the other direction. If your attacker is preventing you from going across their body to break their grip, you go around their body. However, she hasn't been taught that yet, and shouldn't be expected to know it. Heck, she hasn't even been taught the techniques that go in the other direction! At her level, she's learning pieces of the puzzle that will come together later. Her son, the black belt, should have been using passive resistance (make her have control of the technique, but don't fight her on it), because she's not yet ready to figure out those transitions and modifications to make it work.

In my Hapkido class, which is completely focused on hand grabs, this is how it works:

As a white belt, you learn drills such as what I saw posted in the other Kenpo thread. There are 27 drills, mostly which deal with wrist grabs. You have 8 cross-arm grabs, 6 straight-arm grabs, 4 two-on-one hand grabs, and 4 double hand grabs, as well as a few others. In a different order, you have 6 Z-locks, 5 variations of a standing armbar, 5 Q-locks (I don't know if that's the actual name for it), 4 v-locks, and 3 figure-4s. There's also a half-dozen "finishers" to get some to tap out.

As a higher belt, you add in more, which up through blue belt cover different scenarios (grabs from the back, grabs while kneeling, punches, kicks, etc). Red and black belt start to go back through the various scenarios with more advanced techniques. But let's look a little bit about the journey:

• At the white belt level, you have 27 hand grabs, and the prescribed technique is basically gospel. If you're supposed to take them down and then apply a wrist break, and they fall on their back instead of their stomach, you're scratching your head trying to figure out which way to turn, or what to do with them, since your technique has "failed".
• At the yellow belt level, if I take a white belt technique, I should be able to see them fall, go through a list of finishing moves in my head, select one, and then apply it.
• At the purple belt level, I should be able to figure this out through subconscious thought instead of conscious thought - i.e. I see them hit the ground and know where to go.
• At the orange belt level, I should know which way to modify my technique based on how they're falling, instead of after the fact and how they fell.

To look at a specific example, let's say the technique is to apply a Z-lock, take them down to their stomach, and then break their wrist. But they fall on their back instead. I need to know how to switch from a wrist break to an elbow break with the proper footwork and angles.

So I can definitely see how it can work, in the right context.

 

[Flying Crane]

It depends on how its done. I once had a white belt Taekwondo student come up to me and complain that she wasn't able to practice her hand grabs on her son, who is a black belt. He knew what she was going to do and applied all his strength against that motion. She said she wasn't sure she was doing it right if she couldn't use it on him.

I explained to her that she wouldn't be able to. What she would do, if she knew more techniques, is to go the other direction. If your attacker is preventing you from going across their body to break their grip, you go around their body. However, she hasn't been taught that yet, and shouldn't be expected to know it. Heck, she hasn't even been taught the techniques that go in the other direction! At her level, she's learning pieces of the puzzle that will come together later. Her son, the black belt, should have been using passive resistance (make her have control of the technique, but don't fight her on it), because she's not yet ready to figure out those transitions and modifications to make it work.

In my Hapkido class, which is completely focused on hand grabs, this is how it works:

As a white belt, you learn drills such as what I saw posted in the other Kenpo thread. There are 27 drills, mostly which deal with wrist grabs. You have 8 cross-arm grabs, 6 straight-arm grabs, 4 two-on-one hand grabs, and 4 double hand grabs, as well as a few others. In a different order, you have 6 Z-locks, 5 variations of a standing armbar, 5 Q-locks (I don't know if that's the actual name for it), 4 v-locks, and 3 figure-4s. There's also a half-dozen "finishers" to get some to tap out.

As a higher belt, you add in more, which up through blue belt cover different scenarios (grabs from the back, grabs while kneeling, punches, kicks, etc). Red and black belt start to go back through the various scenarios with more advanced techniques. But let's look a little bit about the journey:

• At the white belt level, you have 27 hand grabs, and the prescribed technique is basically gospel. If you're supposed to take them down and then apply a wrist break, and they fall on their back instead of their stomach, you're scratching your head trying to figure out which way to turn, or what to do with them, since your technique has "failed".
• At the yellow belt level, if I take a white belt technique, I should be able to see them fall, go through a list of finishing moves in my head, select one, and then apply it.
• At the purple belt level, I should be able to figure this out through subconscious thought instead of conscious thought - i.e. I see them hit the ground and know where to go.
• At the orange belt level, I should know which way to modify my technique based on how they're falling, instead of after the fact and how they fell.

To look at a specific example, let's say the technique is to apply a Z-lock, take them down to their stomach, and then break their wrist. But they fall on their back instead. I need to know how to switch from a wrist break to an elbow break with the proper footwork and angles.

So I can definitely see how it can work, in the right context.

I’m not sure to what you are referring with your post. You say it can work, but what is it that can work?

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

It depends on how its done. I once had a white belt Taekwondo student come up to me and complain that she wasn't able to practice her hand grabs on her son, who is a black belt. He knew what she was going to do and applied all his strength against that motion. She said she wasn't sure she was doing it right if she couldn't use it on him.

I explained to her that she wouldn't be able to. What she would do, if she knew more techniques, is to go the other direction. If your attacker is preventing you from going across their body to break their grip, you go around their body. However, she hasn't been taught that yet, and shouldn't be expected to know it. Heck, she hasn't even been taught the techniques that go in the other direction! At her level, she's learning pieces of the puzzle that will come together later. Her son, the black belt, should have been using passive resistance (make her have control of the technique, but don't fight her on it), because she's not yet ready to figure out those transitions and modifications to make it work.

In my Hapkido class, which is completely focused on hand grabs, this is how it works:

As a white belt, you learn drills such as what I saw posted in the other Kenpo thread. There are 27 drills, mostly which deal with wrist grabs. You have 8 cross-arm grabs, 6 straight-arm grabs, 4 two-on-one hand grabs, and 4 double hand grabs, as well as a few others. In a different order, you have 6 Z-locks, 5 variations of a standing armbar, 5 Q-locks (I don't know if that's the actual name for it), 4 v-locks, and 3 figure-4s. There's also a half-dozen "finishers" to get some to tap out.

As a higher belt, you add in more, which up through blue belt cover different scenarios (grabs from the back, grabs while kneeling, punches, kicks, etc). Red and black belt start to go back through the various scenarios with more advanced techniques. But let's look a little bit about the journey:

• At the white belt level, you have 27 hand grabs, and the prescribed technique is basically gospel. If you're supposed to take them down and then apply a wrist break, and they fall on their back instead of their stomach, you're scratching your head trying to figure out which way to turn, or what to do with them, since your technique has "failed".
• At the yellow belt level, if I take a white belt technique, I should be able to see them fall, go through a list of finishing moves in my head, select one, and then apply it.
• At the purple belt level, I should be able to figure this out through subconscious thought instead of conscious thought - i.e. I see them hit the ground and know where to go.
• At the orange belt level, I should know which way to modify my technique based on how they're falling, instead of after the fact and how they fell.

To look at a specific example, let's say the technique is to apply a Z-lock, take them down to their stomach, and then break their wrist. But they fall on their back instead. I need to know how to switch from a wrist break to an elbow break with the proper footwork and angles.

So I can definitely see how it can work, in the right context.

I, too, am confused by what you are trying to say here. You seem to be talking about being able to adapt to someone's reactions, not teaching a different SD technique.

 

[Headhunter]

The problem is, this body of techniques has been in existence for decades, and thousands of people have been taught the system and elevated to instructor status. Ed Parker passed away in 1990. It wasn’t until just a few years ago (I don’t remember specifically when) that his daughter and son-in-law decided to trademark everything and demanded licensing fees on the use of the crests and her father’s name and image and I believe the curriculum. So now they are making an attempt to collect fees from everyone who teaches her fathers system, many of whom have been doing so since before she was born.

So I call BS on that one.

Sounds like what Bruce lees daughter is doing, she's constantly posting stuff about her dad talking about his insites and claiming rights to stuff even though she probably barely remembers the guy as she was extremely young when he died yet she talks like she knew him extremely well

 

[drop bear]

I’m not sure to what you are referring with your post. You say it can work, but what is it that can work?

Being able to actually fight as part of that training. Which means not rigidly adhering to the drill and failing and also not throwing every you have learned out the window.

It happens when we go from drilling to situational stuff. And suddenly the other guy isn't jut going to let you get off all those cool moves you have been practicing.

 

[Flying Crane]

Sounds like what Bruce lees daughter is doing, she's constantly posting stuff about her dad talking about his insites and claiming rights to stuff even though she probably barely remembers the guy as she was extremely young when he died yet she talks like she knew him extremely well

Yeah, and to be honest I can understand the desire to have ownership of the family legacy and how it would be frustrating to feel like non-family members use the family to promote themselves, possibly making money from it. I get it, that would make most people grind their teeth. But for a lot of this stuff, the barn door has been open for too long. A lot of it just cannot be stuffed back in. The ship sailed decades ago.

 

[skribs]

@Flying Crane @kempodisciple

I was mainly speaking to the idea of techniques that are "not supposed to work" or that are just "to give ideas of possibilities." Sometimes it's to give options for when things go awry.

 

[dvcochran]

I see...let me clarify.

You cant trademark a specific individual technique such as a certain kick or block or punch due to the lack of originality.

You can trademark a specific curriculum of combinations of techniques for specific responses.

So you cant copy the 60 specific responses that they have published....but you can teach the individual techniques and your own curriculum of how to apply them.

I do think that would hold water. I am not as familiar with trademarks but have held 3 patents in the past. They were all Intellectual Property patents and a Lot of it was how they are worded, what makes them genuine and unique. Two of mine were for process and that had to be super, super spelled out and indisputable that it is genuine and unique.
Of the 3 patents, I went to arbitration twice. One held up. The 2nd time would have cost a good bit in legal fees so I released the claim of violation.

My point to all this is if a Trademark is similar to a patent, it doesn't take a lot to get around it if you do your homework and are willing to take on some hearing time. If you choose one of the techniques you are concerned with, change the name ever-so-slightly, and how you teach the technique AND you can document how your method it different, you would have a solid leg to stand on.

What all this has to do with teaching a MA, I am not certain. Are you currently working out at someone else's Dojo? If so could you hold "Senior belt classes" at your current location as a workaround to any Trademark concerns?

In regards to the Logo; have you ever taken a look at how many TKD logos exist? Tons of them, largely I think as a workaround. And I do not know how many TKD acronyms there are (WT, ITF, ATA, etc....). In many literal ways they all teach many of the same techniques with the same names.

****My advise is purely suggestion and not professional advise. It should not cost a lot to have a Trademark attorney look at your situation and give sound advise. I wonder if you have a response prepared would that not temper any claims of Trademark violation? Do Trademarks expire like patents do?

 

[Flying Crane]

@Flying Crane @kempodisciple

I was mainly speaking to the idea of techniques that are "not supposed to work" or that are just "to give ideas of possibilities." Sometimes it's to give options for when things go awry.

Ok. But some of these are just plain bad ideas. I know people like to see if they can salvage sketchy stuff. Maybe I don’t understand it properly. Maybe I wasn’t taught correctly. Maybe I just haven’t put enough work into it yet. Sure, that can be the case.

But some stuff is just plain stupid.

 

[Flying Crane]

I do think that would hold water. I am not as familiar with trademarks but have held 3 patents in the past. They were all Intellectual Property patents and a Lot of it was how they are worded, what makes them genuine and unique. Two of mine were for process and that had to be super, super spelled out and indisputable that it is genuine and unique.
Of the 3 patents, I went to arbitration twice. One held up. The 2nd time would have cost a good bit in legal fees so I released the claim of violation.

My point to all this is if a Trademark is similar to a patent, it doesn't take a lot to get around it if you do your homework and are willing to take on some hearing time. If you choose one of the techniques you are concerned with, change the name ever-so-slightly, and how you teach the technique AND you can document how your method it different, you would have a solid leg to stand on.

What all this has to do with teaching a MA, I am not certain. Are you currently working out at someone else's Dojo? If so could you hold "Senior belt classes" at your current location as a workaround to any Trademark concerns?

In regards to the Logo; have you ever taken a look at how many TKD logos exist? Tons of them, largely I think as a workaround. And I do not know how many TKD acronyms there are (WT, ITF, ATA, etc....). In many literal ways they all teach many of the same techniques with the same names.

****My advise is purely suggestion and not professional advise. It should not cost a lot to have a Trademark attorney look at your situation and give sound advise. I wonder if you have a response prepared would that not temper any claims of Trademark violation? Do Trademarks expire like patents do?

Just another issue to muddy the waters.

Ed Parker was adjusting and changing his stuff over the decades. Different people trained with him at different times, and tended to keep the stuff as they were taught, often not changing it to keep up with Parker, especially if they were off running their own show. SD Techs may have the same name but may be done somewhat differently. And any old person might just make a minor adjustment to suit their personal whim. So it’s tough to claim any real level of consistency anyways.

 

[skribs]

Ok. But some of these are just plain bad ideas. I know people like to see if they can salvage sketchy stuff. Maybe I don’t understand it properly. Maybe I wasn’t taught correctly. Maybe I just haven’t put enough work into it yet. Sure, that can be the case.

But some stuff is just plain stupid.

Can you provide an example of something that was "just plain stupid."

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Ok. But some of these are just plain bad ideas. I know people like to see if they can salvage sketchy stuff. Maybe I don’t understand it properly. Maybe I wasn’t taught correctly. Maybe I just haven’t put enough work into it yet. Sure, that can be the case.

But some stuff is just plain stupid.

I cant speak for tracy. But there are some things i learned that i originally thought were "just plain stupid". My last instructor helped me find meaning for them. They ended up being more skill huilding-some with crazy movements were actually to help with balance, or flexibility in specific ways, or to teach how to recover from certain non-ideal situations you might end up in. And in the ones where i didnt care for the meaning, there's stuff that i could pull out of the tech. For instance, if you google shaolin kempo combination one, it starts with a backwards parry followed by rushing in. The parry that they do, i would never do, because I'd get popped in the face if they thats how i responded to a straight punch (which is what the parry is for). When i train it, i take out the parry altogether, weave while stelling backwards (what fencing called a distance parry), and use the stance to pounce in after an imaginary hook. Then continue the technique as written. IMO, even though it's a dumb tech, what its teaching is the footwork, not the handmotions.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The problem is, this body of techniques has been in existence for decades, and thousands of people have been taught the system and elevated to instructor status. Ed Parker passed away in 1990. It wasn’t until just a few years ago (I don’t remember specifically when) that his daughter and son-in-law decided to trademark everything and demanded licensing fees on the use of the crests and her father’s name and image and I believe the curriculum. So now they are making an attempt to collect fees from everyone who teaches her fathers system, many of whom have been doing so since before she was born.

So I call BS on that one.

Agreed. If I were from that lineage and wanted to teach, I'd just create a new art/style name to teach under. If someone asked where the techniques came from, I'd show the arts they're derived from in EPAK, and just never mention that lineage in public.

Which is a damned shame. It's like a tennis pro saying their students can't go on to teach an overhand serve. It's BS, and wholly without ethics.