<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>12 July 2001</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT><FONT size=2>Bob:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Yes, a common (although not exclusive) theme running through
these situations seems to be the role of self-serving outsiders. I have not been
able to sort out the exact beginning or catalyst for the example I posted.
However, it clearly has one or more non-community/non-Tribal-type folks sitting
in the background. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I posed several questions to the community member
"writer" of the draft resolution about such things as unenforcability
of the proposed law, academic cooling towards the community, disfranchisement of
unenrolled members, the divisive impact it would have on the community, and the
potential for extreme political manipulation of the language. The responses
given made it clear that the person either 1) just had not thought out much of
the details of the possible impact of the resolution, or 2) the
"writer" was just fronting something instigated elsewhere. Whatever
the case, it will require some more investigation on my part.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>best</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>uthixide</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><B>-----Original Message-----</B><BR><B>From:
</B>Rankin, Robert L <<A
href="mailto:rankin@ku.edu">rankin@ku.edu</A>><BR><B>To: </B><A
href="mailto:'siouan@lists.colorado.edu'">'siouan@lists.colorado.edu'</A>
<<A
href="mailto:siouan@lists.colorado.edu">siouan@lists.colorado.edu</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Wednesday, July 11, 2001 12:56 PM<BR><B>Subject: </B>RE: language as
property, follow-up<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=270354817-11072001>Mark and others,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=270354817-11072001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=270354817-11072001>I
just returned from the SSILA meetings in Santa Barbara and was talking about
this question with some other linguists. I think there is one more
interesting point to be made. It has to do with, yes, lawyers. It seems
that, at least in the Southwest, there are law firms that have caught on to
this movement and are going from tribe to tribe soliciting business (and of
course high fees) for "helping them copyright the language". It
has apparently become something of a racket -- a kind of ethnographic
ambulance chasing. It seems to me that copyright lawyers must already
know what the chances of copyrighting nouns and verb conjugations are and
are simply milking naive clients for every penny they can get. If words were
copyrightable, I suspect that mobile home firm wouldn't be selling Winnebago
RV's any more. Just one more scam for tribes to watch out for.
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=270354817-11072001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=270354817-11072001>Bob</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT size=2>I just wanted to acknowledge all of the fine thoughts
you shared on the topic of language as property. Your comments did not
fall into a black hole. It has given me some more grist for the
dissertation mill.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>