Pasadena Group Photo

[Doc]

Lower Right front is John Conway Jr. then Steve Orcino...and I think Paul Casey is 2nd row, 3rd from R...3rd from L, 1st row is Tom (forget his last name)...2nd from R, back row is Paul Mills...Ed Booze is 2nd row, far R...
Roger Meadows is 5th from L, back row...That's about is for my memory...
Also I believe that day was a test...I made 2nd black...

Yeah it was a test Rick, and I was on the board. Man we're getting old.

 

[KenpoRick]

Doc,
Hope all is well with you and yours...
Old? Well, at least oldER...Ha, Ha...
I think you were on the board of my 4th black test in Pasadena also (1984)...
Ron, you have always been very supportive and enthusiastic, and I thank you for that...
Take care...
Always your friend,
Rick
P.S. Here, I'm a white belt again...starting over gives me more reason to live...Ha, Ha...

 

[Doc]

Doc,
Hope all is well with you and yours...
Old? Well, at least oldER...Ha, Ha...
I think you were on the board of my 4th black test in Pasadena also (1984)...
Ron, you have always been very supportive and enthusiastic, and I thank you for that...
Take care...
Always your friend,
Rick
P.S. Here, I'm a white belt again...starting over gives me more reason to live...Ha, Ha...

Thanks, and I know the feeling Brudda.

 

[AvPKenpo]

Thank you for taking credit for the picture that is on Mr. Mitchells website. www.mitchellkenpo.com Seeing as how I scanned that picture as well as all other pictures on Mr. Mitchells website, from his personal collection, I cannot see how you can take credit for that. Do not post anymore of his pictures from his website. Do not take credit for something that is not yours, even if Mr. Mitchell gave you permission to use the file give credit where credit is due. Please do not misrepresent yourself.
Michael

 

[Kenpodoc]

Thank you for taking credit for the picture that is on Mr. Mitchells website. www.mitchellkenpo.com Seeing as how I scanned that picture as well as all other pictures on Mr. Mitchells website, from his personal collection, I cannot see how you can take credit for that. Do not post anymore of his pictures from his website. Do not take credit for something that is not yours, even if Mr. Mitchell gave you permission to use the file give credit where credit is due. Please do not misrepresent yourself.
Michael

So i guess your suggesting that only Mr. Mitchell got a copy of this group photo. I find your random Hostility interesting since I don't see anyone taking credit for the photo although several of the respondants are in the picture.

Jeff

 

[Doc]

Thank you for taking credit for the picture that is on Mr. Mitchells website. www.mitchellkenpo.com Seeing as how I scanned that picture as well as all other pictures on Mr. Mitchells website, from his personal collection, I cannot see how you can take credit for that. Do not post anymore of his pictures from his website. Do not take credit for something that is not yours, even if Mr. Mitchell gave you permission to use the file give credit where credit is due. Please do not misrepresent yourself.
Michael

So there is no misunderstandings sir, the picture was posted at my request and supplied by me from my personal collection. Although it may be posted on Jim's site, that is not the only place it may be found. I also know it to be on Frank Trejo's site as well. You may discuss its use with him separately if you choose to do so.

However, you will notice that Frank Trejo, myself and many others are in the picture. The business of the day was a promotion test, where I (and others) sat on the testing board with Mr. Parker. If you had been there, you would know "that picture," was made available by the several photographers present to commemorate the event.

Therefore the picture and its display belongs to the photographers, who freely supplied copies to all present, and probably persons not present. Under these circumsatnces, the photo likeness is not copyrighted or at the exclusive use of Jim Mitchell. If you had inquired as to the origin of the photo(s), or even asked Jim before you launched your indignation, this could have been avoided. Had you inquired here first, instead of assuming you were the only one with a scanner and access to the picture, this could have easily been avoided sir.

Additionally, I have other photos that Jim may have copies of as well. My suggestion is you should at the very least talk to the person who supplies pictures to you, before assuming they are the exclusive property and domain of any one individual. Martial Arts pictures are notoriously "public domain" unless published and duly noted as copyrighted material. Of course to do that, you must be capable of demonstrating legally you have exclusive rights to the photo.

With apologies to Rich Hale, I'll see you at the Superbowl Party, "Go Colts."

 

[AvPKenpo]

Doc, I am not one to argue with anyone if I can help excuse me for standing up for this trivial matter. In comparing the image that is on this thread and the image that is on Mr. Mitchells website, the images SEEM to look the exactly same. They look to be cropped at the same points that I cropped my image with dust particles in the exact same spots. Fine could be coincidence. Whatever. At this point unfortunately it is only one mans word against another, and because you have such a large following of people, this forum will sway to whatever you say. I respect that. You have the peoples vote here so I will continue to be a troll and throw my two cents in every now and then. I often sound hateful in my posts, so I apologize for that, let's keep moving forward instead of back....
I hate to agree with you but GO COLTS!!!!
Michael

So there is no misunderstandings sir, the picture was posted at my request and supplied by me from my personal collection. Although it may be posted on Jim's site, that is not the only place it may be found. I also know it to be on Frank Trejo's site as well. You may discuss its use with him separately if you choose to do so.

However, you will notice that Frank Trejo, myself and many others are in the picture. The business of the day was a promotion test, where I (and others) sat on the testing board with Mr. Parker. If you had been there, you would know "that picture," was made available by the several photographers present to commemorate the event.

Therefore the picture and its display belongs to the photographers, who freely supplied copies to all present, and probably persons not present. Under these circumsatnces, the photo likeness is not copyrighted or at the exclusive use of Jim Mitchell. If you had inquired as to the origin of the photo(s), or even asked Jim before you launched your indignation, this could have been avoided. Had you inquired here first, instead of assuming you were the only one with a scanner and access to the picture, this could have easily been avoided sir.

Additionally, I have other photos that Jim may have copies of as well. My suggestion is you should at the very least talk to the person who supplies pictures to you, before assuming they are the exclusive property and domain of any one individual. Martial Arts pictures are notoriously "public domain" unless published and duly noted as copyrighted material. Of course to do that, you must be capable of demonstrating legally you have exclusive rights to the photo.

With apologies to Rich Hale, I'll see you at the Superbowl Party, "Go Colts."

 

[Doc]

Doc, I am not one to argue with anyone if I can help excuse me for standing up for this trivial matter. In comparing the image that is on this thread and the image that is on Mr. Mitchells website, the images SEEM to look the exactly same. They look to be cropped at the same points that I cropped my image with dust particles in the exact same spots. Fine could be coincidence. Whatever. At this point unfortunately it is only one mans word against another, and because you have such a large following of people, this forum will sway to whatever you say. I respect that. You have the peoples vote here so I will continue to be a troll and throw my two cents in every now and then.

Sir, it's not about a following, its a picture that many people have. You need to understand, even if someone took it off the site, its still isn't owned by you or Mitchell. Just because someone has custody of it, doesn't make it exclusive. And trust me, nobody sways to anybody here. However your opinion in any discussion is always welcome and helps to liven the debate sir.

 

[kenpotroop]

AMEN Brother

 

[kenpotroop]

Doc, I am not one to argue with anyone if I can help excuse me for standing up for this trivial matter. In comparing the image that is on this thread and the image that is on Mr. Mitchells website, the images SEEM to look the exactly same. They look to be cropped at the same points that I cropped my image with dust particles in the exact same spots. Fine could be coincidence. Whatever. At this point unfortunately it is only one mans word against another, and because you have such a large following of people, this forum will sway to whatever you say. I respect that. You have the peoples vote here so I will continue to be a troll and throw my two cents in every now and then. I often sound hateful in my posts, so I apologize for that, let's keep moving forward instead of back....
I hate to agree with you but GO COLTS!!!!
Michael

AMEN Brother

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Doc, I am not one to argue with anyone if I can help excuse me for standing up for this trivial matter. In comparing the image that is on this thread and the image that is on Mr. Mitchells website, the images SEEM to look the exactly same. They look to be cropped at the same points that I cropped my image with dust particles in the exact same spots. Fine could be coincidence. Whatever. At this point unfortunately it is only one mans word against another, and because you have such a large following of people, this forum will sway to whatever you say. I respect that. You have the peoples vote here so I will continue to be a troll and throw my two cents in every now and then. I often sound hateful in my posts, so I apologize for that, let's keep moving forward instead of back....
I hate to agree with you but GO COLTS!!!!
Michael

As a student-of-opportunity of Docs (meaning, I train with him whenerv I can, and with many miles between us, that's hard now) I may be one of the supposed people whose vote goes towards Doc. I also know that, if I think Doc is full of beans on something, he's the last person who would want me to be silent on it. That's called friendship, and I am honored to be able to have frank conversations with the man.

So, I resent the implication that this community of posters is without critical reasoning faculties, and we defacto opt out of our ability to think and speak for ourselves in favor of nepotistic preference.

Moreover, unless the people in the photograph have signed away their rights to their own images, and Mr. Mitchell has these waivers in his possession, I fail to see the point as to the origins of the image. It strikes me as moot. I see Doc in the pic. I see others in the pic. Now, I'm not an expert on copyright law, but my guess is that they would certainly have the right to post and explore the pic antidisirreagardlessly of the origin.

Of course, I'm often wrong.

Dave

 

[evenflow1121]

Back row, third from the left looks familiar, but it can't be him: Too much hair.

LOL I was thinking the exact same thing.

 

[Kenpodoc]

Doc, I am not one to argue with anyone if I can help excuse me for standing up for this trivial matter. In comparing the image that is on this thread and the image that is on Mr. Mitchells website, the images SEEM to look the exactly same. They look to be cropped at the same points that I cropped my image with dust particles in the exact same spots. Fine could be coincidence. Whatever. At this point unfortunately it is only one mans word against another, and because you have such a large following of people, this forum will sway to whatever you say. I respect that. You have the peoples vote here so I will continue to be a troll and throw my two cents in every now and then. I often sound hateful in my posts, so I apologize for that, let's keep moving forward instead of back....
I hate to agree with you but GO COLTS!!!!
Michael

I resent the implication of this statement. I respect Doc and what he has to teach. if I disagree with him I simply tell him so.

Interesting hobby studying the picture in great detail. I suspect there are multiple copies of the group picture floating around.

Now I suspect the real intention of this attack was Dr. Chapel's short repudiation of the statement that Mr. Mitchell had taught or run one of Mr. Parker's schools. If that's the problem adress it directly.

Jeff

 

[Rich_Hale]

Wow, I really just don't get it.

I have a little photo gallery on my site at: http://www.pacifickenpo.com/Galleries/Gallery_1.htm and anyone who would like to copy any picture is welcome to it.

Every now and then somone will contact me for permission (which is an unnecessary, but polite thing to do) and it is always granted.

This is the Kenpo Mr. Parker shared with me.

By the way, if any of you want to keep something as yours and yours alone . . . my advice is don't go posting it on the Internet.

Rich Hale

 

[Tames D]

Wow, I really just don't get it.

I have a little photo gallery on my site at: http://www.pacifickenpo.com/Galleries/Gallery_1.htm and anyone who would like to copy any picture is welcome to it.

Every now and then somone will contact me for permission (which is an unnecessary, but polite thing to do) and it is always granted.

This is the Kenpo Mr. Parker shared with me.

By the way, if any of you want to keep something as yours and yours alone . . . my advice is don't go posting it on the Internet.

Rich Hale

That is good advice.

 

[Rich_Hale]

By the way . . . I was on my way to Bas Rutten's for an MMA class when I wrote the little tid-bit about photo that was being discussed as being property of Jim Mitchell.

Although I think my class was a lot more interesting, I still can't get myself to trun away from this conversation. (Kind of driving by a car wreck, you just help but look.)

For the record, in regard to copyright law:

In the case of photographs, it is sometimes difficult to determine who owns the copyright and there may be little or no information about the owner on individual copies.

Ownership of a “copy” of a photograph – the tangible embodiment of the “work” – is distinct from the “work” itself – the intangible intellectual property. The owner of the “work” is generally the photographer or, in certain situations, the employer of the photographer.

Even if a person hires a photographer to take pictures of a wedding, for example, the photographer will own the copyright in the photographs unless the copyright in the photographs is transferred, in writing and signed by the copyright owner, to another person.

The subject of the photograph generally has nothing to do with the ownership of the copyright in the photograph.

This statement was taken directly off the U.S. Copyright Office web site.

So in other words, if whoever scaned the Pasadena photo and put it on Jim Mitchell's web site did so without the express written prermission of the photographer, he is in violation of U.S. copyright laws, as it is the photographer who is the "author" of the material - not the subject(s).

Just a little something to think about.

Doc, I'll see you Sunday . . . I was thinking about bringing my camera, so I'll have my people call your people so they determine a mutually agreed upon photographer to take our picture.

 

[Kenpobuff]

I see Mr. Mitchell has posted two pictures on his site of what appears to be the same group perhaps by two different photograghers. One pic shows Mr. Trejo in the back and one with Mr. Trejo to the far right. I wonder who has the rights to which one...or who cares.

My position is that we should all give thanks for sharing it and too those that have other similar historical photos posted on their sites. Thanks for sharing with the rest of us who weren't there. I think it better serves the Kenpo community to share rather than to hoard pictures, video clips, and information especially when it is of historical reference.

 

[Doc]

By the way . . . I was on my way to Bas Rutten's for an MMA class when I wrote the little tid-bit about photo that was being discussed as being property of Jim Mitchell.

Although I think my class was a lot more interesting, I still can't get myself to trun away from this conversation. (Kind of driving by a car wreck, you just help but look.)

For the record, in regard to copyright law:

In the case of photographs, it is sometimes difficult to determine who owns the copyright and there may be little or no information about the owner on individual copies.

Ownership of a “copy” of a photograph – the tangible embodiment of the “work” – is distinct from the “work” itself – the intangible intellectual property. The owner of the “work” is generally the photographer or, in certain situations, the employer of the photographer.

Even if a person hires a photographer to take pictures of a wedding, for example, the photographer will own the copyright in the photographs unless the copyright in the photographs is transferred, in writing and signed by the copyright owner, to another person.

The subject of the photograph generally has nothing to do with the ownership of the copyright in the photograph.

This statement was taken directly off the U.S. Copyright Office web site.

So in other words, if whoever scaned the Pasadena photo and put it on Jim Mitchell's web site did so without the express written prermission of the photographer, he is in violation of U.S. copyright laws, as it is the photographer who is the "author" of the material - not the subject(s).

Just a little something to think about.

Doc, I'll see you Sunday . . . I was thinking about bringing my camera, so I'll have my people call your people so they determine a mutually agreed upon photographer to take our picture.

That's ok. We're dojg a documentary so there will be a videographer there. Bring some good Kenpo stories, and sign the photo release at the door.

 

[kenpotroop]

I resent the implication of this statement. I respect Doc and what he has to teach. if I disagree with him I simply tell him so.

Interesting hobby studying the picture in great detail. I suspect there are multiple copies of the group picture floating around.

Now I suspect the real intention of this attack was Dr. Chapel's short repudiation of the statement that Mr. Mitchell had taught or run one of Mr. Parker's schools. If that's the problem adress it directly.

Jeff

Really that's funny since it was with me not the other subject. Also no matter what Mr. Chapel or you or anyone else says I believe my instructor.As I would expect you to do. The original question was just that and it was answered by someone who know matter what will think he is right.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Really that's funny since it was with me not the other subject. Also no matter what Mr. Chapel or you or anyone else says I believe my instructor.As I would expect you to do. The original question was just that and it was answered by someone who know matter what will think he is right.

I assume you are referring to Doc. It was also answered by Mr. Hale, who is one of the straightest shooters you're going to meet. If he thought he had done something in poor form, he would be the first to admit it and apologize, regardless of who it miffed or why. Knowing this about him, I waited for his reply, which eventually did come.

That was all I needed.

Dave