It was Ginna S. (WSC Lit Chair)/ Maggie O. (RSR Greater Philadelphia), "that the WSO be instructed to have the Basic Text professionally edited to ensure consistent and correct use of capitalization, verb tenses, gender, singular/plural endings, and other grammatical errors and that the edited text be returned to the literature review committee for acceptance and approval prior to printing and distribution."
The Third Edition Revised stood until the end of 1987 when the WSO introduced the "Professionally Edited" Fourth Edition. Someone was paid to re-write Our Book and it was published without our permission. This was no light editing, but a major rewrite of the Basic Text. Along with 100's of minor changes there were many conceptual changes and nearly 30 lines missing.
At WSC 1988 the Executive Director, Bob Stone said we could not go back to the 3rd Edition Revised as many Area's wanted because contracts with outside enterprises had been signed and money received. He suggested we "fix" the book by inserting the missing lines. The Fifth Edition was a compromise that missed the point of the Fellowship's objections to the Fourth Edition. What about the conceptual changes?
According to one of the Trustees, many at World Services wanted a more professionally written book, one that would appeal to the treatment professionals who treated many addicts. The Fellowship preferred a book written by Addicts, for Addicts. The WSO decided, behind closed doors, to change Our Book and then concealed their actions, blaming it all on typesetting errors.
The frustration felt by some NA Members regarding interference by World Services in the literature development process, as well as the excessive cost of our literature, led them to take a controversial step. The publication of a bootleg Basic Text. They published the Third Edition Revised and included the censored passages from the original, Fellowship approved Traditions chapter. These books were sold for about a dollar or simply given away.
Controversy spread throughout the Fellowship about the "baby Blue" or "little, illegal" Basic Text. Our "world service leadership" initiated a campaign aimed at stopping its distribution.
In the summer of 1990 Wagner and Middlebrook, attorneys for the WSO, sent registered letters to hundreds of trusted servants around the Fellowship. They were warned to avoid any involvement with the "illegal" basic text. Any who were involved were ordered to "cease and desist". All of them were directed to complete enclosed questionnaires. The following day, they all received a letter, sent by overnight express mail, from the Chairperson of the WSO Board purporting to explain why WSO took this action.
Many of these members responded in anger, hurt, and confusion. They felt they were being accused, threatened, their anonymity broken, and thousands of dollars of the Fellowship's money spent to wage an intimidation campaign.
From: Wagner & Middlebrook, Attorneys
Date: July 10,1990
Re: FELLOWSHIP OF NARCOTICS ANONYMOUS
Worid Service Office
Our Docket No.: 03-9545-15.XX
This office represents WORLD SERVICE OFFICE, INC., the service office for the Fellowship of Narcotics.Anonymous. My client is the owner of United States Trademark and Service Mark Registration Nos. 1,450,681, and 1,476,774, for the marks NARCOTICS ANONYMOUS and NA logo. My client is also the owner of United States copyright Registration Nos. TX 2 112 598, TX 2 250 589, TX 2 342 402, TX 2 250 588 and TX 2 254 607, covering the First through Fourth editions of the NARCOTICS ANONYMOUS Basic Text. The registration for the Fifth Edition is now pending.
It has come to our attention that you may have been printing and/or distributing a version of the copyrighted Basic Text, including unauthorized duplications of the NA Fellowship's trademark to include the totally false legend that the version being distributed is "Fellowship" approved. These actions violate the NA Fellowship's rights under both Title 35 and Titie 17 of the United States Code, as well as constitutes consumer fraud on the members of the Fellowship of Narcotics Anonymous, and unfair and diluting use of the registered marks.
IF YOU ARE OR HAVE AT ANY TIME ENGAGED IN THESE ACTIVITIES, YOU ARE HEREBY DIRECTED TO IMMEDIATELY CEASE AND DESIST IN ALL SUCH ACTIVITIES, as well as any other infringements that may have not yet been discovered. Please confirm by return letter that each and every infringement has ceased, and surrender the remaining infringements to this office.
Simply being a member of the Fellowship of Narcotics Anonymous does not give you, or any other member, the right to engage in unauthorized use of the marks or copyrights of the Fellowship of Narcotics Anonymous, or to falsely represent that approval has been granted to these materials.
We ask that you accurately complete, sign, date and return the enclosed response in the postage paid envelope provided. If we are in receipt of your immediate agreement in wnting that all further infringement and distribution of infringing items has ceased, we will consider this matter closed. If we do not receive your immediate and full cooperation, my client is prepared to institute litigation against you and your company to protect these properties from your misuse, as well as costs and attorneys lees. May I have your response within ten days of the date of this letter.
Very truly
yours,
Theresa
Wagner Middlebrook, for
WAGNER
& MIDDLEBROOK
This response is made by the following person or company:
Name _______________________________________________________
Address _______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Please check the correct response:
________ We have never printed any copies of the Basic Text.
________ We have never distributed any copies of the Basic Text that consist of the following: a light-blue paperback cover containing the first ten chapters of the Third Edition of N.A.'s Basic Text, replacing the material on Traditions Four and Nine with material from the Second Edition text
________ We have printed copies of the Basic Text consisting of a light-blue paperback cover containing the first ten chapters of the Third Edition of N.A.'s Basic Text, replacing the material on Traditions Four and Nine with material from the Second Edition text, and agree to print or distribute this NO LONGER. Our inventory is _______ books at this time.
________ We have sold, given away, or otherwise distributed printed copies of the Basic Text consisting of a light-blue paperback cover containing the first ten chapters of the Third Edition of N.A.'s Basic Text, replacing the material on Traditions Four and Nine with material from the Second Edition text, and agree to print or distribute this NO LONGER. Our inventory is ______ books at this time.
________ Other response: ________________________________________
I declare under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Signature and date
Printed name
The WSO sent a letter and a historical review of the Basic Text to registered groups. The publishers of the bootleg text were accused of making a personal profit and of making arbitrary changes in the book. Neither statement is true, but most of the Fellowship did not know that. The historical review omitted a lot of the facts.
There were other communications with the Fellowship, such as the November 1990 Fellowship Report, which continued the vicious attacks against those involved. Finally, World Services decided to sue one of the NA Members involved in the publication of the bootleg text. Announcing their decision they reiterated the disinformation and character assassination.
The lawsuit was filed by WSO, but the entire leadership of World Services voted unanimously to sue. Without seeking guidance from the Fellowship, they committed us to spending tens of thousands of dollars on legal expenses. The suit was filed in December 1990. They also filed a motion for an immediate injunction against the defendant, claiming an undeniable, self-evident case against him. Their motion was denied, and both parties were directed to settle the dispute.
In their settlement, signed January 4, 1991, they agreed upon several points. "In an effort to heal any wounds" statements were to be published in the Fellowship Report, Newsline, and NA Way calling for peace, a full and adequate discussion of the issues, and an admonishment against any recrimination within the Fellowship. They agreed to publish in the 1991 Conference Agenda Report the closing remarks of the Judge, along with three motions: that the Fellowship choose which edition, or parts thereof, will be the approved Basic Text; that the WSO produce a reduced price version of the BasicText; and that the WSC obtain a direct, group-by-group tally of the first two motions. WSO Inc. agreed to print these motions "without comment".
A committee known as the "Trust Document Working Group" consisting of several members of the Fellowship, (who had participated over the past 10 plus years in writing the Fellowship Literature, including but not limited to the Basic Text), as well as Grateful Dave and Trusted Servants and other representatives of World Services, was created to work on a trust document for the ownership and management of the Narcotics Anonymous Fellowship literary works, tradename and trademarks.
The Trust Document Working Group met in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania in February, 1991 and held two extensive conference calls on May 30, 1991 and June 25, 1991. During this time representatives of World Services assured them that their concerns and input about ownership of the Narcotics Anonymous literary work would be resolved to the mutual satisfaction of all parties involved.
The Court enforced motions failed at WSC '91 amid the continuing histeria.
The defense charged:
That World Services'
representatives were proceeding with undisclosed and ongoing tactical plans
of scheming and abhorrent behavior of controlling and acting as if the
Fellowship literary works were their own property. Among these was the
announcement at the 1991 WSC, contrary to representations made to the Trust
Document Working Group and without prior publication to the Fellowship
as MOTIONS intended for group conscience approval, "Affirmations" to confirm
claimed ownership and enforcement rights to the Narcotics Anonymous literary
works by World Services;
That an extensive
period of Conference time was given to the WSO Lawyer Thersa Middlebrook
to give legal analysis and opinions to help grease the vote;
That WSO
Inc. had filed registration with the United States Copyright
Office on or about May 22, 1991, of certain Amplifications of Copyright
Forms in an attempt to correct improper registrations. (If at first you
don't succeed...);
That there had been
published and distributed to voting participants 30 days prior to WSC 91
a WSO BOD report containing improper and persuasive comments about
the claimed copyrights held by World Services and Grateful Dave's
challenge of these copyrights in an attempt to influence negative votes
on the agreed Literary Work Motions. World Services representatives
had spoken with members of the Fellowship, including voting WSC participants,
about the Motions and their effects if passed. Letters had been mailed
to members of the Fellowship, including Voting Participants, days after
the January 4, 1991 Agreement making unfair comment about copyright infringement
of the NA literary work. There had been published in the 1991 WSC Agenda
Report comments about NA Fellowship literary works and references to the
Baby Blues as "illicit". A 5-page "REPORT CONCERNING THE MOTION FOR
A LOW-COST BASIC TEXT" had been printed placing financial fear in voting
participants of the effects of a low cost Basic Text.
After WSC '91, World
Services continued to lead members of the Trust Document Working Group
to believe that the approval of the Literature Trust Document would "supersede"
the result of the tainted voting procedure. On June 21, 1991, World Services
announced to the Working Group that the next scheduled conference call
for June 28, 1991, would not be held because they lacked funds - despite
earning over $1.2 million in 1990 by Basic Text sales alone. False representations
of agreement among the Trust Document Working Group were made to the Fellowship.
With their charges
contained in a "Motion To Enforce Or Vacate" the defense went back to court.
