It was not my intent to anger you, if I have.
As I see it, paying for the information is not the reason to collect
it in the first place. Even with a 'nominal' fee. That one does not
gain a financial profit is not the point. Why bother with a
registry, if it is not freely available to all who may require it?Â
This sound elitist to me. We are talking about a bisic reference
that should be planned to collect registration information and make
it abailable to any that may wish to access it. Registering a
cultivar is a personal decision, but if one cannot research previous
cultivars through such a registry, I see no reason to take part in
it. And I am not alone in this thought. I have spent many years
attempting to get Europeans to register their cultivars and many
don't, as they feel this brings them no benefit. I tend to agree
with them, especially when they then need to pay to access this
information. Even then, there are many people who would like access
to such information for research and they are certainly not
interested in yet another expense. It simply becomes too expensive.
Although I hybridize Iris, Hemerocallis and a few other genera, I am
not a large scale producer and see no reason to compete on that
level. If I would like to do a name check, and then find out this
will simply cost me money, I would tend to just use the name of
choice and forget any controls or registration. After all, if I'm
selling only a few dozen plants, I am certainly going to keep my
costs low. Why should I care about some registry that hides itself
from the general public and only opens its portals for those that
wish to purchase rights to use it. I have to applaud the American
Hemerocallis Society for keeping its registry open to all who may
wish to peruse it. I feel this has increased the awareness of
registrations and their purpose and the price of registration is
still affordable for the hobbyist, as well as the big producer.Â
Mistakes and duplications are much easier to identify and control.Â
There are winners all around.
I get the feeling you either miss my point, or simply believe
everything must have a price attached. Just because it doesn't
cost, doesn't mean it is not of worth. I don't feel we need to
pursue this further. We simply differ in our viewpoints. Fine, and
you present a good arguement. I simply don't agree. Were you in
the debate team in school?
Jamie Vande
Cologne
Germany
Am 08.12.2010 00:57, schrieb C*@aol.com:
Actually, the point
to which I respondedÂwas your inaccurate statement that one
had to be a member ofÂAIS toÂobtain access to the Registration
information. I see you now wish to make some other points.
Â
I have already
spoken to the inaccurate notion that any chargesÂare a
fund-raising activity for AIS. AIS isÂby definition not in it
for the money and the rules of theÂInternational Registrations
scheme are clear as to what is permitted, and what is not.ÂÂ
Â
The policy of the
AIS to charge a nominal feeÂto registrants for registrations
is one at whichÂmany people also balk,Âyet youÂsuggest that
the normal and expected expenses for running the office should
be passed on to them as fees, as distinct from spreading the
costsÂaround to all who wish toÂenjoy access to the
information. How, then,Âis that consistent with making the
information available toÂeveryone on an equitable basis? I
find I am much attracted to the notion ofÂpeople helping pick
up the bill for that part of the process which benefits them
directly.
Â
That said, I think
it is only a matter of time before you will get your
wish,Âfree electronic information, all you want, if, in
fact,ÂAIS survives.ÂBut even then there willÂbe a lot ofÂwork
to be done, and there will be no shortage ofÂpeople making
sure their voice is loudly heard about how best someone else
should do it.
Â
Â
-----Original
Message-----
From: JamieV. j*@freenet.de
To: i*@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, Dec 7, 2010 6:17 pm
Subject: Re: [iris-species] 'Gerald Darby': Seeds,
Descriptions, Nomenclature
Â
Actually,
you have reinforced my point. The registries should
be a part of public domain. Especially, today, with
the internet, there is no reason to purchase a
printed document to research names. As much as I
love books, this is a waste of paper, IMO. Any
costs involved in making this information available
should be part of the registration costs in
general. The idea of a registry is not to simply
record the registrations, but to make this
information available. In the past, when printed
document was the only method of record transferal
available, I understand the need to charge for
documents. Today, I find this is no longer a
factor. This new tradition of making information a
financial good to raise funds is simply not forward
thinking. There is already much too much important
research locked behind internet portals, that could
make life a lot more interesting and future research
more relevant. I see no good reason why one should
pay a fee for imformation that is intended for the
public domain. The ASI needs to re-think this
policy.
Jamie Vande
Cologne
Germany
Am 07.12.2010 22:35, schrieb C*@aol.com:
"ÂI
wish more of them were available to the
general public, which the Iris registry
largely isn't. One must be an AIS member to
access most of it.Â--"
--------------------
You do not have to be an AIS member to
register an Iris name, or to obtain
information about registered names or Irises.Â
Â
The whole purpose of the registration
systemÂis to make information available to
everyone, everwhere-- the nursery industry,
gardeners, hybridizers, and the general
public-- for everyone's common benefit and
education.
Â
The AIS publishes theÂregistrations for
each year as a booklet called "Registrations
nd Introductions", and publishesÂa ten year
compilation each decade called a Check List,
and these records are available for purchase
by anyone. TheÂR&Is areÂavailable in the
spring of the subsequent year. The AIS
StorefrontÂsells Check Lists for each decade
back to the 1939Âedition, and the prices are
very modest. They make excellent gifts for
libraries.
Â
The team of proofreaders is working on a
new ten year compilation as we speak.ÂAt this
time, under the agreement by which AIS serves
as ICRA for Iris cultivars of the non-bulbous
kinds, the Society is mandated to continue to
publish the registrations information in hard
copy.ÂThis publicationÂserves notice to the
interested world of the registration or
introduction of a unique new cultivar.
Â
There is also anÂelectronic edition of the
Check Lists on line, by which I mean the
internet, which includesÂseveral decades, with
more information being added all the time. So
far as I am aware, this resources is available
to anyone anywhere who paysÂthe small annual
fee. If I err in this statement, someone who
usesÂit will,ÂI am sure,Âcorrect me. I prefer
to use the paper copies, myself.Â
Â
The fees for either the hard copy, or the
electronic copy, are charged not to make
profitÂfor AIS,Âbut toÂoffset theÂexpenses of
the registration activity, and publishing the
information to the world. This is not some
shakedown racket AISÂhasÂcooked up,Âit is an
honorÂaccorded to it by the knowledgeable
members of the international plant
community,Âand, like many such honors,Âit
boils down to a tremendous amount work.
Â
IÂdon't like toÂrefer folks to my
ownÂessays since I figure thatÂis sort of
tacky, but if someone is interested in this
subject,Âand does not understand how AIS came
to be registrarÂin the first place, they might
want to look at the secondÂstory down on this
page.
Â
Â
AMW
Â
--
Jamie V.
_______________________
KÃln (Cologne)
Germany
Zone 8
--
Jamie V.
_______________________
KÃln (Cologne)
Germany
Zone 8
|
