• Subscribe to
    Lloyd’s Blog via RSS.
 

Urban Homestead in Southern California


Note added after I posted this: read the comments(below) on this bogus operation.
"Surrounded by urban sprawl and just a short distance from a freeway, the Urban Homestead project is a family operated and highly productive city farm. It is also a successful, real-life working model for sustainable agriculture and eco living in urban areas and has been featured in multiple news medias both nationally and internationally. 
   Our work in creating Urban Homesteading as a flourishing and self-sufficient lifestyle using minimum resources and land has been referenced as a progressive and forward-thinking example and sourced as the representation of future city planning and reclamation worldwide. For over a decade, we have proved that growing ones' own food can be sustainable, practical, successful and beautiful in urban areas.
   We harvest 3 tons of organic food annually from our 1/10 acre garden while incorporating many back-to-basics practices, solar energy and biodiesel in order to reduce our footprint on the earth’s resources. This website documents the many steps we have taken and hopes to inspire fellow travelers on their own life-changing journey…
Click here.
Thanks to one of our many anonomai.

11 comments:

Trashdigger said...

Lloyd. While I love your blog I must recommend you look into the Dervaes family who have been trying to monololize and capitalize on the term urban homestead. Many people have been hurt by their actions. One in particular is the Denver Urban Homesteaders. Trying to copywrite a common terminology is ridiculous.

Darren (Green Change) said...

I was a regular follower of the Dervaes family's projects for several years, until that whole "urban homestead" trademark thing. I really didn't like the way they attacked other people for using the term, and their reaction to the ensuing criticism was terrible.

Anonymous said...

Hi Lloyd

Love your blog and you're as cute as a button, but I must agree with Trashdigger and Darren - nix the Dervaes family. By trademarking the term Urban Homesteading and Urban Homestead (terms they did not make up themselves)and then strong arming people who had been using the terms for years they deserve the boycott that has followed. It would be a little like you trademarking the word Shelter...

Anonymous said...

I hope I don’t get rotten tomatoes tossed at me….

Is it possible this conflict of ownership is in Historic and Illustrious company?

Claiming a name, is somewhat akin to claiming space in time. Perceived or Actual or Legal ownership of a name may ensure one’s space in time…..or it may not.

Inventor of Telephone
1. Alexander Graham Bell
Antonio Meucci

Inventor of Radio
Tesla
Marconi

Discover America
Columbus
Leif Ericson
St. Brendan

Discovery of Haumea
Michael E Brown – California Institute of Technology
José Luis Ortiz Moreno – Spanish

Calculus
Isaac Newton
Gottfried Leibniz

Airplane’s Flight Control
Wright Brothers
Glenn Curtiss

Lasers
Gordon Gould
Theodore Maiman


Anonymous said...

To Anonymous
No, sadly, it is not the same thing at all. This is a newer phenomenon. The key difference is that the trade marker is not disputing something he invented or had a hand in creating or using. He is taking over a term in common usage, part of the public commons if you will. He did not invent it and It predated him by at least 40 years (earliest use in print dates from the early 1970s). We had a case in Baltimore that was a lot like this. If you've never been to Baltimore, we have a term "Hon" that is part of our regional charm. It is the short form of Honey said with a Barlemer (That's "Baltimore" for non-natives) nasal drawl. It's like "Howdy" is in some areas. It is plastered all over bumper stickers, mugs, T shirts and souvenirs. There are businesses that use it as part of their name. We have a street fair called the "Hon Fest" where people wear fake, exaggerated 1950s style bee hive hairdos and have fun in the sun. One Johnny come lately cafe owner trademarked the term. She didn't invent it. It predated her by decades. It was in common use. That immediately put a whole regional culture at her mercy. Could the city still run the Hon fest? What about the business that used it or had it in their name? What about tons of souvenirs already on the shelves? Could they still be sold? Could writers no longer use it on line or in print? The answer? As the trade mark holder, it would be entirely up to her whim. Think of what a legal mess it would cause if someone trademarked the word "Howdy" or "Poor Boy" (a sandwich New Orleans is famous for), or "Boston Cream Pie"? After it is trademarked, the trade marker owns it as his personal property and no one can use it without paying him to do so. The cafe owner backed off after a public outcry. You may trademark anything that you invent or find a new use for. Sometimes, two people may dispute who invented what. Your examples show this. This is not about disputing something two people may have invented independently and disagree about who was actually first. This is about appropriating part of the public commons in use for decades and calling it your own because you had the bright idea of sneaking off to the trademark office. That's bad enough, but what they have been doing is sending out what amounts to cease and desist letters to web sites, book publishers, businesses and nonprofits in existence long before they came on the scene. There is an author who published his book before the trademark was applied for, and now his publisher can't promote his book. They sent a letter to a public library because they were holding an urban farming seminar for the public. That is beyond contempt and that is why people have withdrawn their support. It offends their sense of fair play.

Lloyd Kahn said...

Boy, I hit a hornet's nest here, and a justified one at that. I agree with all the above. Hey, Dervaes family, I'm preparing a presentation to be called The Urban Homestead.
BTW, Buckminster Fullet, so beloved by so many, did the same thing with the geodesic dome. In 1955, he got a patent on a structural system first built in Germany in the 1920s. He also coined the word "tensegrity" to apply to a structural principle invented and built by others, most importantly by artist Kenneth Snelson. Thirdly (pardon the RBF rant, but this kind of opportunistic dishonesty pisses me off), Fuller never gave credit for " The Dymaxion car" to 1913 Alfa Romeo Castagna Aerodinamica. Same mentality.

Anonymous said...

to quote......

Etymology[edit]

Latin nihil sub sole novum, from the Hebrew אֵין כָּל חָדָשׁ תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ (en kol chadásh táchat hashámesh, “there is nothing new under the sun”), from Ecclesiastes 1:9.

Proverb[edit]

There is nothing new under the sun.
1.There is nothing truly novel in existence. Every new idea has some sort of precedent or echo from the past.


so...

........

Anonymous said...

Interesting http://dervaestrademark.wordpress.com

Anonymous said...

first...am not the just about Anonymous..just to be clear..

myself, it seems to me - you has by the way never been invovled in patents, and can barely grow weeds in my backyard garden, let alone feed my family...

it seems to me, from the very little i have read the website that the Dervaes do offer considerable benefit/info to anyone interested...

re the above poster, i agree, it is an interesting link, and , i feel, rather important point.

for some time, i have heard / read rumours/articles of the following, and i gotta tell you, it does concern me..In fact, it is hard to understand how it has been "allowed"......

http://www.genome.gov/19016590
There are now patents associated with around a quarter of the genes in the human genome

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/15/health/court-genes

http://weill.cornell.edu/news/releases/wcmc/wcmc_2013/03_25_13b.shtml
You Don't "Own" Your Own Genes
Researchers Raise Alarm about Loss of Individual "Genomic Liberty" Due to Gene Patents That May Impact the Era of Personalized Medicine
NEW YORK (March 25, 2013) — Humans don't "own" their own genes, the cellular chemicals that define who they are and what diseases they might be at risk for. Through more than 40,000 patents on DNA molecules, companies have essentially claimed the entire human genome for profit, report two researchers who analyzed the patents on human DNA. Their study, published March 25 in the journal Genome Medicine, raises an alarm about the loss of individual "genomic liberty."

Anonymous said...

This isn’t in North America, but still, quite an accomplishment
http://permaculture.org.au/2009/06/26/rosina-buckman-living-smart-on-the-sunshine-coast/
The Sunshine Coast does have something going for it though – a strong Permaculture community: The Permaculture Noosa group in particular. Rosina has been a member of the group for only eight years, but despite that her little urban homestead is a great, positive, living example of the work of the individuals that make up the group’s ranks. Her little yard boasts a profusion of edible and/or ornamental plants that all together create a veritable garden of eden in the midst of suburbia. Rosina has managed to transform her property from a bland, generic cookie-cutter type yard into something that’s not only entirely practical, but also highly aesthetic.

Anonymous said...

thanks for share........

Post a Comment