After 13 years online, Cubits.org is scheduled to be shut down. Please make sure you have the contact information for all your friends, and that you download whatever content you want from this site.
Thanks once again for these reactions, all of which are useful. I do think that hybridizers putting their plants on the market, unless they are really well-known, are aware of the impact that good photos posted in the right places have so they'll be seen. Of course, many of the well-known creators either have their own catalogues or they have a distributor who takes care of the publicity side of things. It is in the first year (and sometimes, to a lesser degree, in the second year, depending on the arrangement one has with the distributor) of commercialisation that one will make a bit of money on the plants, so I don't think anyone has to feel guilty about a bit of trading when they have too many of a registered and introduced cultivar; it's better than putting them through the grinder! It's also good publicity for the hybridizer that their plants are widely distributed.
I'll have to give some thought to a pseudonym to publish the ethics text under; not a bad idea---if people will then read it with an open mind, it might be the way to go.
several people pressed the 'like' button & I gave a bit of agreement. I think the iris pollen could be put in 2 paragraphs under that heading, but that is just for easier reading.
Hi everyone;
Thanks for the encouragement. . . as long as people read it, my goal is attained. If they think to comment on it as well, all the better. Any document of this type is "perfectible", after all, so it may go through a few revisions though I doubt if it will ever see print in "official" magazines or newsletters.
True AIS is registration, not a lawyer. I would think that they could notify a person that the iris is wrong. But doing so overseas might be difficult. Does the person know that they have the wrong iris? Even officials can make mistakes.
Well, I can understand AIS reaction.....at least part of it. As Lucy said they aren't lawyers....although they probably COULD bring a lawsuit to court....after GETTING a lawyer, AND enough scientific "experts" as needed to "prove" the iris is "wrong", and the use of the name is fraudulent. It would seem to me that ,at least, (as Lucy also noted) a letter should be sent, "explaining" the problem, to the "second introducer".....and, CERTAINLY, Richard Cayeux should be made aware of the issue....after all, HE is actually the "wronged party" here, ........I can see this happening with an iris name from years, and years ago...original hybridizer and/or introducer long passed....iris not offered 'commercially ' any more, both "iris" and "name" pretty well forgotten.....but with an iris that ISN'T all that old, from a FAMOUS iris house !
BONBON ACIDULE
(Cayeux, R. 2007) Sdlg. 98112A. TB, 33" (85 cm), M
S. and style arms white; F. light acid yellow, darker edges; beards red. 9549C, sib to Chateau d'Auvers sur Oise, X 9338D: (Beachgirl x Joli Coeur). Cayeux 2008.
I would think that it is first Richard Cayeux's job to contact the people & explain they have the wrong plant. Could have them from each other & not bother to look. His name in irises should carry enough weight.
Perhaps I should add that the iris wiki (once again) has two photos. . . one correct and one incorrect, right next to each other. I don't know why no one thinks to correct this sort of nonsense. In the "history" of additions and corrections, there is even one so-called correction that removes both photos---and then puts them right back on. Go figure!
Hi all
Everyone knows the name of Richard Cayeux in the Iris World and is aware of the name of his irises, which are legally registered.
The point is not a question of law;
That is going on in France, a small country where we do not have as many hybridizers as you have so everybody knows the names of Cayeux's irises. There is no excuse to use the name of one of his irises. Here they are well known. What you have to know is that is done in a vicious purpose. Not only the name has been used to present an iris which is not from Cayeux but the wrong iris has been presented under the Cayeux's name. We want, both Michèle and I, warn you about what is going on here. This is a fact and we are having the evidence. Richard Cayeux is a gentleman far to imagine people doing that and they take advantage of his personality. I am French, ashamed of what is going on in the French iris world and disgusted of all these shameful behaviours. As Michèle mentioned it, the name has been use by a man par of the board of this iris group (deputy president), which is the second of the group. If people handling a group are not able to respect law and ethics nobody will. You have to know also that they managed with lies to have me banned from both I. Lovers and I. hybridizers. This group is advertising the irises of an Australian hybridizer, which is not the point of a FRENCH iris group. And when these people are supported by other people from the iris world who are clapping their hands whatever they do they can think they are allowed to behave such a disgusting way. I am not an hybridizer neither an iris sellers. I am conducting a very important study about French irises in France and the French iris group is trying to take credit for my work. When I perfectly know that someone is speaking the truth I wont have any relationship with anyone being prejudicious to the reputation of my country and the one of the French iris world. Black ship should be banned from this world.
C.
I kept all the correspondence with officials proving my work is my work and when you are carrying a study over many years you are automatically entitled to the copyright.
C.
!
!
