ВОЗМОЖНО ТОЛЬКО ЧТЕНИЕ
https://forum.lebendige-ethik.net/
08.08.04
Redaction of the website
“Living Ethics in German”
Rostock, German
info//lebendige-ethik.net
Embassy of Russia in India
Shantipath, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi
indrusem//del2.vsnl.net.in
[center]Open Letter
to Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Russia in India,
member of the Board of trustees
of the International Roerich Memorial Trust,
member of the ICR board Alexander Kadakin[/center]
Dear Mr. Ambassador!
Dear Alexander Mikhailovich!
Dear roerichite!
Edition of our Internet-site “Living Ethics in Germany” knows your services to the Roerich movement, about your personal friendship with Svetoslav Roerich who established on base of the senior Roerichs home the International Roerich Memorial Trust (IRMT) which has been registered in Indian state Himachal Pradesh on April, 18, 1993. We also know that in 2000 in Delhi was held a meeting of the IRMT Board of trustees which decided to state the assistant manager of the IRMT museum post from the Russian side as well as such an assistant post from the Indian side. We know that Indian IRMT representatives announced competition in which a young graduate of Delhi university Rakesh Khanduri has won. Now answer some our questions, please. It would be interesting to readers of our site, which is visited by about 400 persons from the largest Roerich societies all over the world.
Dear member of the IRMT Board of trustees Alexander Mikhailovich, why is the IRMT assistant manager from the Russian side appointed by an individual decision of your former colleague at a diplomatic corps and the present Moscow organization president Yuliy Vorontsov? Why is not free competition announced as it was made by the Indian side?
Dear roerichite Alexander Michailovich, why does the international Roerich public know nothing about the IRMT work? Personally you and also members of the Russian embassy in India rendered much unselfish assistance to IRMT. So is not there opportunity to involve the technical staff of your embassy in creation of the most simple Internet-site which could deal with the IRMT work? Roerichites all over the world would like to know about the IRMT purposes and problems, that were put by S. N. Roerich, and also about plans for the Roerich house reconstruction.
Dear Mr. Ambassador of Russia in India, how do you like the idea of registration of the word “Urusvati” as the trademark of the ICR Moscow organization, the member of which you are? Answer this question, please, as the person who has written the foreword to “Urusvati Institute of Himalayan Studies”.
Dear Alexander Mikhailovich! You can answer the above-stated questions in any mass media. The main thing that Roerichites of Russia and other countries should know is the first-hand truth about the IRMT work from you, the person who is the member of the IRMT Board of Trustees.
For you to know the rate of events it is applied to this letter the following materials:
• Appeal of roerichites of CIS to roerichites of other countries.
• Article “ICR registers a word “Urusvati” as a trade-mark!!!”.
• Article “To patent is forbidden not to patent”.
A copy of this letter with appendices (in English) our edition sends to your colleagues to IRMT to the address: International Roerich Memorial Trust. India, Himachal Pradesh, District Kullu, Naggar.
Yours sincerely,
the editor of the site “Living Ethics in Germany”
Andrej Luft
24.07.04.
[center]Appeal of the Roerich-followers
from the Commonwealth of the Independent States
to foreign Roerich-followers[/center]
Dear followers of the Roerich family in Europe and America!
Dear friends!
Dear brothers and sisters in spirit!
The followers of the Roerich family from the Commonwealth of the Independent States appeal to you.
After the registration of the sacred sign of the Banner of Peace as a trademark by the International Roerich Center (IRC), Moscow, and its consequent use of the patent to silence the disagreeing organizations, the IRC is now trying to register the sacred name of the Mother of Agni Yoga - Urusvati - as its own trademark. The ICR has already filed a request to the Central Russian Patents Agency in order to do so.
In winter 2002-2003, when we learned that the Banner of Peace sign was being registered as a trademark, a lot of letters were written to the Russian Patent Agency demanding to cancel the registration. But our requests, and appeals had no effect.
Now we are turning to you, our foreign friends, with the request to help us cancel the registration of the Banner of Peace sign as a trademark and stop the registration of the word "Urusvati" as a trademark of the ICR. The only organization that is able to challenge the decision of the Russian Patent Agency is the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Our previous attempts have shown that simple letters are not enough. We kindly ask you to hire a qualified lawyer who would be able to initiate and win a lawsuit against the decision of the Russian Patent Agency. We are ready to provide you with all the collected by us information about the worldwide status of the Banner of Peace sign and the historical origin of the word "Urusvati" at any time.
We hope for your cordial help! We are the one united family because we have the same Mother - Mother of Agni Yoga - Urusvati!
Signatures (in alphabetical order):
[center]Societies [/center]
• The Georgian Roerich-Society "Roerich. Mother the World ", 200 members, chairman Tamaz Tavadze, city Tbilisi, Georgia.
• Society of Alive Ethics, 12 members, chairman Vladimir Efimchuk, city Volgshskij, the Volgograd region, Russia.
• Public Women's movement "Ozetshanka", chairman Knyazev Lybov, city Ozersk, Russia.
• The Roerich-Society of the city Ozersk, chairman Gonibesov Helena, city Ozersk, Russia.
[center]Private persons[/center]
• Balahonov Pavel, Mezhdurechensk, Russia.
• Borodin Jury, Kemerovo, Russia.
• Brosin Alexander, Dubna, Russia.
• Busel Anna, Zheleznodorozhnyj, Russia.
• Vasina Irina, Moscow, Russia.
• Gatis Kalnins, Valmiera, Latvia.
• Kalentjev Victor, Zavolzhe, Russia.
• Kosov Lydia, Kemerovo, Russia.
• Kyshlar Roman, Kishinev, Republic Moldova.
• Subbotin Gennady, Kemerovo, Russia.
• Tlostanova Asiat, Majkop, Adygea, Russia.
• Fokina Natalia, Tbilisi, Georgia.
• Shvets Jury, Donetsk, Ukraine.
The Roerich-followers of the countries CIS support
• Dostal Sofia, Vienna, Austria.
• Zandi Naazimm, Stockholm, Sweden.
• Luft Andrey, Rostock, Germany.
• Melkoumian Feliks, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA.
The copy of the Appeal has been sent on August 15 this year to the following societies
o "Agni Yoga Society"
o "New York Roerich Museum"
o "Sociedad Hispanoamericana de Agni Yoga"
o "AUMM - The Asociacion Unidad Mundial de la Mujer"
o "Frank Perry.Co.UK"
o "Frieden durch Kultur Europa e.V."
o "Nicholas Roerich-Projekt"
o "Association Agni yoga"
o "Agni Yoga Hellas"
o "Comunita di Etica Vivente di Citta della Pieve"
o "Agni Yoga Nederland"
o "Sociedad Agni-Yoga Hispana"
o "Asociacion Darjeeling Agni ROERICH (museo Roerich for la paz y la cultura)"
o "Instituto Nicholas Roerich"
12.08.04
[center]A.Kadakin's answer to the open letter[/center]
Having sent on August, 9, this year the open letter to Alexander Kadakin, next day our edition has received the answer. Alexander Mikhailovich has sent copies of his answer to dozens of addresses among which, probably, were his colleagues and friends-roerichites. Taking into account this fact and also using the right of edition to publish all editorial mail, we publish the letter completely, in full.
* * *
"Dear mister [editor],
I thank you for the letter. I do not make secret of the fact that there are so many questions in it that it is not possible to answer them all. I shall try to answer the most important ones.
1. There never was a personal assignment of the Kullu museum assistant manager by Y. M. Vorontsov from the Russian side. The decision was accepted at the Trust meeting unanimously by both Indian and the Russian representatives. Competition on this post is not required, as ICR from the very beginning, that is even before registration of IRMT, since 1991, rendered all help and assistance in organizing IRMT. Except ICR, NOBODY, ABSOLUTELY NOBODY of the Roerich world helped me, to the embassy or to the Trust. In this situation what competition could be announced?
As to Khanduri, the competition was held because of the demands of the Indian civil service, to which he belongs. He gets his salary from his Government and not from the Trust. By the way, as a worker he is good for nothing and the Trust gets rid of him by decision of the trustees full staff.
2. The IRMT Internet-site is created. The embassy assists, but, being diplomatic mission, can no interfere in activity of such PUBLIC ORGANIZATION as Trust. The embassy, enjoying full rights, takes part in the work of Trust, but does not lord it. Any actions are coordinated with the Himachal Pradesh government, the main minister of which (Virbhandra Singh) is the Trust president. All the roerichites should understand that Kullu is not Russian patrimony or estate but a JOINT Indian-Russian project that must adequately preserve our common and as a matter of fact world cultural-philosophical and material property of the Roerichs.
3. Concerning registration of the Roerich symbols I can only say that Svetoslav Nikolaevich Roerich has ENTIRELY transferred all rights to the publication of works and symbols to the International Center of the Roerichs, I am an eye-witness of it. Not to be lost in the labyrinth of casuistry, I think, that as he was the last of the Roerichs he had the right to act like this. This right prevails that what was determined by Nikolay Konstantinovich many decades ago when also the Trust and ICR did not exist at all. It is my own opinion. Lawyers should study this question. I do not doubt at all the ICR competence to use the symbols.
4. On August, 10 the Trust executive council meeting will take place. I think, that the important decisions on celebrating the 100th anniversary of S. N. Roerich will be accepted. The main task, as I see it, is worthy carrying out of all celebrations instead of arguing to whom and what belongs on competition or without it. The Roerichs belong equally to Russia and India, and to all mankind.
5. Since August, 3 a new ambassador in India is V. I. Trubnikov. I shall continue cooperation with IRMT as I founded it on a commission from S. N. Roerich. Indeed, with participation of the Indian friends it is made much in Kullu. The fact, that more than 100 thousand people visit the house a year, speaks for itself. The government of India repeatedly provided with half a million of American dollars in total for repair and the maintenance of the museum and the gallery. No country in the world did and does so much as the government of India does for preservation of Russian, and as a matter of fact Russian-Indian, heritage of the Roerichs. The Russian patrons of art from industrial and bank circles have considerably helped too.
I wish you all blessings and successes. I hope, that work on the worthy 100th anniversary of Svetoslav Nikolaevich celebrating becomes the mainstream of your organization's work. It is not time and not a place now, before the celebration, to undertake any investigations of the questions specified in your letter to me ant in your appeals. Any conflicts in proving primacy or secondariness of the rights to the Roerichs only testify that still there are many people in the world that aspire to not immortalizing of their works, creativity and even a material heritage ( Kullu, Bangalore, Kalimpong etc.), but to immortalize themselves under the pretext of the Roerichs. I am sure, it would be impossible to the Roerichs.
Good-bye!
Yours faithfully,
A. M. Kadakin"
After receiving an answer from Alexander Mikhailovich our edition has thanked him for the rendered respect to readers of our site and has offered him to continue the dialogue with the purpose to find out some questions. Alexander Michailovich has not reacted to the offer in any way. Questions remained undecided.
The comment no the A. Kadakin's letter of Daniel Entin, Director of Nicholas Roerich Museum, New York, makes the situation in Kullu somehow clear. We suggest that the readers should make the acquaintance with the D. Entin's opinion, and then they should continue reading of the editorial staff to the A. Kadakin's answer.
The comment of edition on A. M. Kadakin's letter
Let us comment the A. M. Kadakin's words in the sequence given in his letter:
1. To my question, why competition for getting the post of the assistant manager of the International Roerich Memorial Trust does not appear, Alexander Mikhailovich declares that there is no question about that, because "NOBODY ABSOLUTELY NOBODY', except for ICR, helped the Trust. It is difficult to believe it. D. Entin in the comment confirms it. It means that the member of the IRMT Board Alexander Kadakin simply tried to lead into error readers of our site. But what for? Probably to keep for the ICR Board the right of individual assignment of the assistant manager of the house in Kullu. According to the style of the ICR board of officials it is possible to assume that they (Kadakin and Vorontsov) have not admitted any representative of the Roerich world to the IRMT tutorial council structure who would stand in opposition to ICR (and they are not a few but maybe the majority). So to find out a true state of affairs it is necessary to address to the Indian members of the IRMT tutorial council, and in particular, to its president Vibhadra Singh. Our edition will take this step with the purpose to find out a real state of affairs in Kullu. It is especially necessary as Alexander Kadakin is no more the ambassador of Russia in India. Whether he will be in India or will be compelled to leave the country, we do not know. Whether the new ambassador will render so much attention to IRMT as it did Alexander Kadakin, we do not know too. Therefore we shall hope for skill to communicate of the Indian representatives of the Trust.
2. The questions about plans for development of the Roerichs buildings complex in Kullu remained undecided. What will be development of institute "Urusvati"? If it will be decided to make a scientific centre working on themes of Living Ethics, it is clear that participation of the western and American sides will be necessary since only in these countries it is possible to get a required high-quality scientific equipment. Besides, the European and American sciences have already made many steps to Living Ethics not knowing about that. If to acknowledge these achievements, which in the West have already got popularity and recognition, it will be much easier to modern institute "Urusvaty" to join the high-tech scientific world. It means that wide international cooperation with the project of giving a new life to institute "Urusvati" is necessary. So in this case it is necessary to involve not only Russia and India, but also other countries. It is natural, that it should do roerichites because only those scientists can work in institute "Urusvati' who know and study Living Ethics instead of the scientists who do not know it. It is an important principle which should be followed.
If the Trust does not wish to develop scientific activity, then IRMT having present structure will settle the museum matter. But in any case it is necessary to find out plans of the IRMT tutorial council.
3. Concerning prevalence of the rights of the son S. N. Roerich, over the right of the father, N. K. Roerich, D. Entin has told precisely enough. Our edition joins the opinion of director of Nicholas Roerich Museum in New York.
4. Our edition is little interested in celebrations and the public actions directed on popularization of the name of the Roerichs. Undoubtedly, these actions are necessary, but our site is devoted, basically, to philosophical and scientific comprehension of Living Ethics, instead of "worthy carrying out of celebrations". Therefore we leave this item without comment.
5. Concerning a place and time of investigation in the field of unworthy use of symbols and names of Living Ethics our edition considers that finding out of truth and searches of the best ways of decision of conflict situations will be the best gift to the Roerichs, roerichites and to all earthmen. Any hushing up and absence of information create effect of a muddy water in which, as is known, pikes very easily swallow small crucian carps.
Therefore our edition supports crystal honesty and transparency. It is our credo.
12.08.04
[center]Comments of D.Entin to Kadakin's letter[/center]
Dear redaction,
I have just read your exchange of messages with Alexander Kadakin. Some parts of his response to you left me speechless with surprise, but not so speechless that I cannot overcome my speechlessness and offer some response.
First, I would like to address the question of Mr. Kadakin's modesty. He does not give himself credit, in his response to you, for all of his own many achievements in India in strengthening the institutions and activities in India that are connected with the Roerichs. Whether in Kullu, or in Kalimpong, or in Bangalore, the evidence of Mr. Kadakin's committment is clear. The Trust and the Museum/House in Kullu are secure and flourishing because of him. Helena Roerich's stupa in Kalimpong is maintained and honored mostly because of him. The rescuing of Tataguni in Bangalore, and the building of the memorials there, are due to his devoted efforts. Let us offer gratitude to him for all these things. Let us give credit where credit is due.
Still, some of the things he states in his message to you are contradicted by the facts. He emphasizes that the International Centre of the Roerichs in Moscow, and only that Centre, and no one else, has ever offered or given help. This ignores completely the help given over the many years, beginning long before there was a Moscow Centre or a Trust, by so many people. Katherine Stibbe and Ingeborg Fritschi, on the behalf of our Museum, sent funds regularly to help Ursula Eichstadt in her work, and continued to do so for many years. Our Museum donated materials -- postcards, prints, and books -- regularly for them to sell. The Roerich Gesellschaft Deutschland always sent help. Many volunteer workers from all over Russia and elsewhere gave their time and labor. The Samara Centre has given much valuable help in recent years. And even Mikhail Lunev, when he was in India, helped them greatly. No one can claim to be the only one to care or to help. So again, let us give credit where credit is due.
To state that the Trust is a Russian-Indian project is true, but without recognition of the founding and the history of Urusvati Institute and the Roerich home. And that blindness to history is not beneficial to anyone. Originally established by the Museum in New York, it was a branch of that museum. All its activities were supported and maintained by the New York museum. It would not even exist without that history. Let us give credit where credit is due.
Now, to turn to the difficult question of the copyrights to the symbols and names. There are enough quotations in the book Hierarchy to show the true meaning and purpose of the symbol of the Banner of Peace. That symbol belonged to no person, no matter what is written or said nowadays by people with a personal interest in establishing control over it. The symbol, remember, was part of the Roerich Pact, developed in New York and Paris, and signed in Washington by all the members of the Pan-American Union. It is not a dead treaty, it is a treaty in force. If the symbol belongs to any entity it belongs to the Roerich Pact. That Pact has no nationality, it is a global pact. The Pact, and its symbol, the Banner of Peace, belong to everyone.
Perhaps the most breathtaking statement in Mr. Kadakin's message is that the son, Svetoslav Roerich, can reverse the decisions of his parents regaring rights and copyrights. Can a son take back what his parents have given? Even Svetoslav Roerich himself made no such audacious a claim. In his letter of gift to the Soviet Roerich Fund, he states clearly that his gift of materials and rights does not include anything given previously by any member of his family. So evidently the son understood the ethics and legalities, but the present claimants do not. And the very same exception is included in the Power of Attorney given by Svetoslav Roerich to the International Centre of the Roerichs -- that same document that Mr. Kadakin saw with his own eyes when it was being signed. It is, by the way, the same document whose validity is being challenged in the courts, because, as a Power of Attorney, it ceased to be valid at the moment of Svetoslav Roerich's death.
I will leave to others to conjecture and discuss the reasons for saying these things. I simply want to set the record straight.
Daniel Entin
This is not a private letter to you, and you have my permission to show it or give it wherever you wish.
24.07.04
"Urusvati. It is time to say that this is the name we have given to the star which is irresistibly approaching the Earth. Since long ago it has been the symbol of the Mother of the World, and the Epoch of the Mother of the World must begin at the time of Her star's unprecedented approach to the Earth." (Illumination, 2.4.11)
"Svati, or Urusvati is the planet Venus. This planet is named so in the Great White Brotherhood." (Letter of E.I. Roerich from April, 2, 1936 to R.Ya. Rudzitis)
"Having got a support of the scientists from India, America and Europe, N.K. Roerich on July 29, 1928 being in Sikkim put the beginning of the Himalayan Research Institute operation. The Institute was named Urusvati, that means The Light of the Morning Star." (P.F. Belikov, V.P. Knyazeva)
[center]ICR is to register the word "Urusvati" as a trademark!!![/center]
Yesterday from message to one Russian-language Internet-forums the Roerich Community learned about the intentions of International Center of Roerichs (ICR, Moscow, Director - L.V. Shaposhnikova) to register the word "Urusvati" as a trademark. It will give the personal disposal of this word. This message is given below in full.
Date: 23/07/2004
Time: 17:19
Internet-forums "Grani Epokhi"/("Edges of the Epoch") "Agni Yoga and Theosophy"
Subject: "About registration of the word "Urusvati" by ICR as a trademark"
"On 06.05.2004 г. "ICR" filed a request N. 2004709942 for registration of "Urusvati" as a trademark".
All people who are not agreed with this new action of ICR should appeal against the request until August 6, 2004. The time is short. It is necessary to write to Federal Office of Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks. The address: 123995, Moscow, Berezhkovskaya naberezhnaya, 30, building. 1. The head of the Office: Simonov Boris Petrovich.
Information was received from O.V. Rumyantseva, (State Museum of East, Moscow), phone. +7 095 202 99 84.
There is an article in "Banner of Peace" newspaper about action of ICR (N. 7(131) 2004 г.)
If one takes into account that ICR have registered the "Banner of Peace" sign as a trademark, then there are no doubts about truth of this fact. The fact is that the worldwide spread of "Banner of Peace" sign did not prevent from the official registration, i.e. from giving a State patent allowing personal disposal of the Sign by ICR. It gives a right to forecast that the "Urusvati" word will be privatized successfully by ICR.
The intentions of ICR are clear - the administrative stuff of this organization try to get the new lever of pressure upon the "disagreeable" Roerich organizations. The patent on "Banner of Peace" sign has become such a lever. After registration of "Banner of Peace" sign as a trademark of ICR, this organization sent the "Informational letter of ICR to Roerich organizations" (see Appendixes). In that letter the ICR made clear for the Roerich organizations directly, that the use of "Banner of Peace" (its image) in activity of these organizations "is possible only by permission of the rights holder - International Center of Roerichs". And since the almost part of Roerich organizations uses this Symbol in their emblems, in publications, during public activity and etc. it becomes clear that all Roerich organizations became dependent on the "rights holder". If one thinks that our team exaggerates too mach then - there is a fact supporting our suppositions. It is a judicial persecution of Byelorussian Roerich Foundation (BFR), whose activity diverges with the ICR point of view. The concrete charges are given in "Resolution about revocation of permission on use the "Banner of Peace" sign and honorary names of Roerichs by Byelorussian Roerich Foundation (BFR)" signed by Secretary of ICR Executive Council I.V. Orlovskaya. (See Appendix 2).
The case with BFR have shown to all followers of the Roerichs that ICR is hardly intended to strengthen it's own way directed to force subjecting of the Roerich organizations to its own personal will. Many Roerich organizations begin to avoid the public use of Banner of Peace. The photo-reports from Roerich conferences become rare, since many organizations are afraid of persecution from ICR, because all the public activity is under Banner of Peace.
The pressure from ICR can be increased if the registration of the "Urusvati" word would be admitted. But the second act of registration of the sacred symbols and words as trademarks of the separate organization is the main negative moment. In this way all the symbols of the new Epoch will be sold soon. If it will be so, the New Epoch may be not comes. ...
The registration of Banner of Peace sign in winter 2002 stirred up all the Roerich community both in Russia and abroad. There were a lot of letters against this anti-culture action. But the efforts to cancel the registration in Russian Patent Agency were unsuccessful. The only organization that is able to influence on the decision of Russian bureaucracy is the World Intellectual Property Organization. But a qualified lawyer, experienced in international patent law is required to make and advance the compliant to this Geneva-situated organization. There is a big evidential base collected about the worldwide spread of the "Banner of Peace" sign (a sign of Triunity). The evidences of historicity of the "Urusvati" word can be collected easily. Thus, one can propose that the lawsuit against the decision of Russian bureaucracy about registration of the Banner of Peace and possible registration of the word "Urusvati" can be ended with cоurt victory.
But the qualified lawyer is expensive. Our team have no such amount of money. Therefore we ask the foreign colleagues to hire a lawyer for the advance of lawsuit against ICR in the World Intellectual Property Organization.
It's impossible to keep silence! Who except us, the followers of the Roerich family, can protect the name of Mother of Agni Yoga?! Let write to us, let write and make phone calls to Moscow to the Patent Agency, to the Museum of East. Let write to the Roerich forums, make phone calls to friends (in Roerichs). The main idea - don't keep silence! Keeping the honor of the name of Mother of Agni Yoga depends on each of us!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendixes
Appendix 1.
Informational letter of ICR to the Roerich organizations
International Center of Roerichs
Nongovernmental organization at UN
Russian Federation 121019,
Moscow, Malyi Znamenskyi per., 3/5
phone. +7 095 203 6127, fax +7 095 203 7184
E-mail: [email protected]
12.02.2003 N.056
The Executive Committee of the International Center of Roerichs informs that, executing the will of its founder S.N. Roerich, the International Center of Roerichs have realized the state registration of its symbolics in accordance with Legislation of Russian Federation.
Roerichs paid a big attention to registration of symbolics of organizations created by them, and to the "Banner of Peace" symbol in particular. N.K. Roerich and Yu.N. Roerich have registered a sign of the "Urusvati" Himalayan Researches Institute and its name "Urusvati" as a trademark. Considering the "unauthorized use of Name and Sign" unacceptable1 E.I. Roerich pointed repeatedly on the necessity of "Banner of Peace" registration in her letters. She wrote in one letter: "It is inadmissible that dubious organizations use our Sign as a cover" (E.I. Roerich. Letters, v.2, M.2000, p.427, 443).
Executing the precepts of Roerichs and being an owner of the Roerich Heritage, passed by S.N. Roerich, and, realizing sequentially the work on protection of names and symbolics of Roerichs, the International Center of Roerichs started the process of state registration of its symbolics in 2001. In 2002 the International Center of Roerichs received a certificates from Russian Patent and Trademarks Agency on the ICR sign and "Banner of Peace" sign. The International Center of Roerichs as a rights holder of these signs, protected by protective certificates of Patent Agency, have acquired the exclusive right to use and manage these signs. In compliance with the established order the use of the indicated signs by other organizations and persons is possible only with permission of the rights holder - the International Center of Roerichs.
The ICR Executive Committee.
Compared with original
Secretary of the Executive Committee I.V. Orlovskaya
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix 2.
http://www.roerichs.com/Publications/Movement/BFR1b.htm
Resolution about revocation of permission on use the "Banner of Peace" sign and honorary names of Roerichs by Byelorussian Roerich Foundation (BFR)
To the Council of Byelorussian Roerich Foundation
11.11.2003 N.454
Dear members of the Council!
As you know, the International Center of Roerichs (ICR) is an owner, keeper and manager of the heritage of Roerichs family including symbolics. It was passed to ICR by Svyatoslav Nikolaevich Roerich in 1990.
At the instance of your organization the ICR gave permission to Byelorussian Roerich Foundation in 1999 on use the Banner of Peace sign and name of Roerich. It was taken into account that BFR would become a collaborator in common activity not only in investigations, popularization but also in preservation of art and philosophical heritage of the Roerichs. But, despite the liability taken by yourselves and allocated in Constitution of BFR the concrete actions of your organization witnessed about lack of correspondence with goals and tasks, which are inflicted on the organization bearing the honorary Roerich name and using their symbolics.
The main reasons, stimulated the ICR to revoke the permission on use the "Banner of Peace" sign and the name of Roerich from the Department of Justice of Byelorussia Republic are the following.
The leaders of BFR refused once from supporting the initiative of Byelorussian division of ICR in conduction the action "Alarm of the conscience" aimed to restitute the N.K. Roerich and S.N. Roerich paintings, being in temporary storage in the Museum of East, which belong to ICR according to the testament of S.N. Roerich from March 19,1990.
In 2000 the BFR tried to republish the book "Proceedings of Washington Conference on the Roerich Pact", being stored in ICR archives, without agreement of its owner (ICR).
Contrary to the will of S.N. Roerich and copyrights of ICR the BFR assisted in the spreading of infringing books of E.I. Roerich Diaries published by "Sphere" publisher, Moscow. On this fact the Byelorussian Division of ICR had to turn to the prosecutor's office of Byelorussia Republic. As to the fact of ICR copyright infringement the charge was brought against the administration of "Sphere" publisher (ch. 146, part 2 of Russia Criminal code) and it was transferred to the court.
Byelorussian division of ICR offered to the representative of BFR (if he is ready for cooperation) in 2003 to write down their [BFR] attitude to illegal publication of E.I. Roerich Diaries by "Sphere" publisher and to other actual and fundamental questions of Roerich movement. There is no answer until now.
The International Center of Roerichs and International Council of Roerich organizations realize the joint cultural-social activity with Roerich organizations on base of creative cooperation treaties. But BFR always avoids from signing such a treaty and concrete cooperation. According to information obtained from Byelorussian division of ICR, the BFR have opposed against "Banner of Peace" sign registration in National Center of Intellectual Property of Byelorussia Republic. Thus, the Byelorussian Roerich Foundation have broken the will of the Roerichs themselves, who considered that the "Banner of Peace" sign should be protected by state registration.
Taking into account the information given above the administration of International Center of Roerichs have decided to recall its permission on use the "Banner of Peace" sign and the honorary name of Roerich from the Justice Department of Byelorussia Republic.
Yours faithfully
ICR Vice-President
V.B. Morgachev
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. - incorrect citing in letter , because these words are concerned with the other symbol, not "Banner of Peace" See http://www.paxpercultura.org/aktual_13.html (Russian)
30.07.04
"...Symbols are as banners to which warriors can rally to learn their orders. Loss of the Banner has been considered the defeat of the army. Likewise, a disregard for symbols can deprive us of a concept inexpressible in words. Furthermore, a symbol is a reminder of the entire Teaching. The secrecy of the symbol is, as it were, a tension of energy."
(Aum. 437).
"It is a fact that there are many who would like to destroy each useful beginning. It is difficult to say who are the more harmful, the dark ones or the fanatics. Often the heart of the latter is even more inaccessible. Appropriating the inheritance of others, they have shouted the most merciless threats to all humanity. Be not surprised that they seize the best symbols and distort them. Not without reason have fanatics been called mutilators. One of their distinctive qualities is the lack of a sense of beauty. They can blacken the most beautiful thing, not through malice but from a lack of a sense of beauty. Indeed, such failings go to make up a very dark stratum, but there are many fanatics, and they make difficult the path of knowledge."
(Fiery World. Book Two. 254)
[center]To patent it is forbidden not to patent[/center]
(the decision, where to put a comma, is left to the reader)
In the last decade the mental wave of total patenting has swept across Russia. Churches patent relics in hope "to secure" them from encroachments of dissident sects. Public organizations patent unique names, stiffening in their "uniqueness". And businessmen patent their trade marks and labels, trying to be protected from unfair competitors. There is a war of patents, war of trade marks, war, war and war…
Unfortunately, in the shameful wars of a modern civilization it is involved even that layer of society which is called to build new evolutionary public relations on principles of cooperation, peace and friendship. As the reader guesses, the question is about you and me - about roerichites of the beginning of the third millennium. Let us try to understand where to put a comma in the headline of this article.
[center]To patent, it is forbidden not to patent [/center]
Supporters of the sacred symbols of the Roerich movement (RM) patenting motivate their position by necessity to secure these symbols from possible abuses or cases of humiliating use. Businessmen, "ignorant" in Roerich symbolic, get into an "unreliable" category first of all. Odious persons and societies, which obviously compromise RM, also belong to this category. That is, if any Roerich organization owns patent rights, say, to the Banner of Peace, it will not be too difficult to supervise the use of the Banner in conformity with the high ideals specified in Living Ethics for the sign - "the sign of Trinity" (N. K. Roerich), the sign of the Banner of Lords, the sign of the new epoch.
Such a position can not but win people by its pure intentions. One can only support a work of such organization. For example, among such organizations is Nicholas Roerich Museum in New York. In 1965 the Museum has registered the Banner symbol with the signature " Pax Culture" ("Peace through Culture" in Latin) as a service mark for educational and cultural purposes (see inscription on the patent). In the American patent-right there is such an opportunity - to register any symbol for cultural purposes. In one of Internet-forums the present director of the Museum writes on the subject that interests us the following:
Nicholas Roerich himself did give the symbol many years ago to our Museum as its logo, and the Board of Trustees applied to the Copyright Office in Washington to have it trademarked as belonging to the Museum. The application was refused, precisely on the grounds that it is a universal symbol, and is not subject to copyright protection. We were informed, however, that if we added the motto of the Banner, Pax Cultura, with the image of the Banner, we could then register it that way, and we did so. The Pax Cultura Banner is to this day a registered trademark of Nicholas Roerich Museum in New York. The certificate of registration is in our files. If you want to see that certificate, you can find it at this link:
http://www.agniyoga.org/gb/forum/pax_cultura_patent.jpg
We therefore have a legal right to control its use, but that does not mean we have an ethical right to refuse to permit its use to people who want to use it with reverence for its meaning. As I've pointed out before, the legal and the ethical are not necessarily the same.
We do not try to control the use of the Banner by anyone, but sometimes the legal right has its benefits. It is possible, for example, to misuse the Banner (one can even promote killing for peace), and we have from time to time invoked our right to prevent such distorted uses. Otherwise, we have been happy for others to use the Banner and its symbol, to spread knowledge about it and to promote its use. We have no ethical right to try to prevent that. The more people know about it, the more they think about its meaning, the more chance we will have for peace in the world. Let us hope that no one ever tries to prevent others from using the Banner in a wise and reverent way. Let us hope that no one ever thinks of it as their "property", as if such a thing could be owned. Some things are beyond ownership. It would be like claiming that the rays of the sun are someone's property.
Daniel Entin, Director
Nicholas Roerich Museum, New York
January 11, 2003
The first important conclusion from the message - American Copyright Office refused to have the Banner symbol without a motto trademarked on the grounds that it is a universal symbol. And in 37 years "Rospatent" has done it, not paying attention to tens (or hundreds) of objections and indications that it is inadmissible to have the Banner symbol trademarked. Even tens of documental certificates, today known to everybody, who is interested a little in the question, do not stop it.
The second useful conclusion - the Museum in New York uses the patent to protect honour of the Banner symbol, but not to assert some "special" powers of this organization, i. e. the patent is not a cudgel in a struggle with objectionable Roerich societies, even if they do not share the opinion of Nicholas Roerich Museum.
The most essential third conclusion - "the legal and the ethical rights are not necessarily the same". If a man studies Living ethics, in his life he tries to follow it but not narrow Philistine ethics. So a Philistine considers legal and ethical rights to be equal.
Thank God, Daniel Entin, director of Nicholas Roerich Museum in New York is not among them. So he wrights on January, 27, 2003 at the same forum:
First, I have to repeat important facts that were mentioned by me previously. First, we had a "service mark" registered not for the Banner symbol alone, but for the symbol with Pax Cultura below it as its motto. That is the logo of the Museum, given to us by Nicholas Roerich himself. We were not able to register the symbol alone, because it is a universal symbol, like a Christian cross or a Hindu AUM sign, and not subject to ownership.
Even so, those fine distinctions are not often known by people, and the symbol itself is widely identified in the people's consciousness as being part of the Museum's identity. We always encouraged people and groups to use the symbol, to spread awareness of its existence and meaning. But we occasionally objected to its use when that use was seen by us as misuse.
One example will be sufficient. During the Vietnam War, there were peace demonstrations and marches in all cities, almost continuously. Many of those activities were intentionally violent, because peaceful protest had so little effect. Occasionally, the most violent groups used the Banner during their demonstrations, and we (not I -- I was not yet in any position of authority) decided that it was an improper way to use the Banner and the symbol, since its purpose was never a violent one. We were able to persuade some groups to stop using the Banner.
The situation today is almost the same. There are many demonstrations and marches against the war in Iraq, and in those marches one can see the Banner pin on the lapels of many people. The Banner itself is also sometimes carried. None of these demonstrations have become violent, but they certainly will, as the frustration of the people increases and they try to stop the war. We once again will try to persuade people who misuse the Banner from doing so. The Banner's message is Peace through Culture, not Peace through Violence.
After the words our edition does not doubt where to put a comma, but…
[center]To patent it is forbidden, not to patent! [/center]
But there are some other examples of the patent using of the Banner symbol. For example, the Moscow organization "The International Centre of the Roerichs" (ICR) having the Banner symbol registered, alongside with a trade mark of the organization (see the patent - an emblem of globe with the pigeon), in a wonderful way has managed "to convince" officials of "Rospatent" of the individual rights for the world Trinity symbol.
After that ICR sent threats with requirements of submission to all Roerich societies (we acquainted already our readers with the actions). All means are used: from ordinary "distortion" of truth as it was with unsubstantiated allegation about the H. I. Roerich will of patenting the Banner of Peace (see the article on this occasion on the site "Peoples unity under the Banner of Peace") to judicial and militia sanctions. If we recollect rout of publishing house "Sphere" and prosecutions of the Belarus Fund of the Roerichs, organized by ICR, then the position of supporters of patenting does not seem so convincing and undisputable. The ICR supporters say that these organizations have broken something: disputable unknown terms; the will, stated on perishable pieces of paper; contracts, promises and other attributes of the modern business-right. It is ridiculous when people try to drive in the New World on old sledge of leaving consciousness. Can the epoch of Cooperation be built on accounting contracts? Can the Maitreya Epoch - an epoch of embodied philanthropy - be built on actions like taking away of pictures? Will the thinking of a contemporary be directed to the bright future by carrying out actions "as in olden times"?..
The important factor of tension is a complete silence of ICR - everything is done without a word, i. e. without notification or giving any explanations to roerichites. For example, yesterday one of keen roerichites has found out in archives of "Rospatent" the proof, that ICR, as it turned out, has a word-combination "the Banner of Peace" trademarked. So sword of Damocles is drawn over such ICR opponents, as "Peoples unity under the Banner of Peace" or the newspaper "Banner of Peace". It is an unpleasant situation… But any Roerich society can find itself in their place. For example, our edition would not like to receive summons for giving explanations concerning "the Four stones" accomplished by N. K. Roerich. And it can happen if ICR will register "secretly" this symbol in "Rospatent" and will announce a desire to have the international recognition of such a certificate.
The most interesting thing is, that ICR supporters proclaim right purposes in business of patenting of the Roerich movement symbols, and in practice act quite the reverse. Everybody knows about the using of the Banner symbol in the Moscow bank "Masterbanc" trade mark. Is it ethic to use the Banner symbol in a trademark of the financial institute existing on monetary incomes, if the Banner is a sacred symbol of Lords, one of whom did not advise to live on monetary incomes, as the profit is dirty? But apparently, in case with "Masterbank" ICR has decided to disregard the Teacher's legacy and to make exception for the Board member - Mr. Bulochnik, director of "Masterbank'.
As always, everything depends on the person. One and the same right can be used in the name of Common weal or for oneself. If the reader doubts, what approach will be right from the New World point of view, we refer him to Leaving Ethics.
If we try to abstract oneself from standard rules of a modern civilization and if we try to think a little in a new fashion, as agni yogi does, then we can say, that all conflicts are because of patenting of the Banner, and of word "Urusvati", and of the patents using as means of pressure upon other Roerich societies (RS), which was arranged by ICR, and the conflicts do not create working, charitable situation in the Roerich movement. Instead of thinking about the future, roerichites are compelled to be involved in bureaucratic distractions. Instead of giving more time to studying a new epoch, roerichites are compelled to rummage in legal certificates and other nonsense of the leaving world. Instead of writing articles on Living Ethics, roerichites are drawn in the making of appeals, messages and objections. Yes, our edition regrets for the time, wasted on dealing with uncultured application of the Banner of Peace patent by ICR. But we have no another way out of the situation. Otherwise sooner or later we must forget about freedom of speech, freedom of idea and about free Roerich activity. Therefore we ask our readers' pardon for delay of some popular-scientific articles. But better late then never!
The point is in a small comma… A free choice is - it is still existing - for you, dear roerichite!
