NA Way of Life

Out House

What's up with the copyright
of the NA Way of Life book?

21 May 1998
I heard some disturbing news, that a book being written by the fellowship for the fellowship has
been copyrighted under a single person's name? What right does an individual have to take what I
have shared and call it there own? Please enlighten me and tell me what you know about this.
In loving service,
Tom B.

24 May 1998
In March of this year, the NA Way of Life book was copyrighted in my name for the NA
Foundation. This was done due to a perceived atmosphere of aggression because members out in
the NA Fellowship were getting the impression that we were planning to turn the book over to
world services at some point. This ignores our extensive writings about why we are doing a book
by addicts, for addicts with no interest in personal gain or recognition. As originator of the project
and still committed to transfer the writing to the general Fellowship, my copyrighting did not
change the fact that I hold the copyrights by right of authorship. With thousands of witnesses,
there can be no question about this. Some members came with the idea of taking control of the
project. They must have failed to read our Foundation documents. The documents make it very
clear that we do not intend this book to become a commercial property or to have it re-written
once we have brought it to a satisfactory level of completion. We are pledged to this concept.
We will continue to make this free work available freely so that any member in the worldwide
Fellowship can participate in the writing. We assure them that a professional will not re-write
their efforts after it is complete.
While we are quite committed to opening the door to Fellowship participation in the content of
this work, we are equally committed to keeping the work open and free. Allowing the work to
continue without copyright protection would be asking for trouble. While we freely share what
was freely given to us. We have good sense. We know that there are thieves, who would steal
our good work for their mean purposes.
In Loving Service,
Bo S.

25 May 1998
I am saddened, I was just beginning to build excitement in getting involved with something I
perceived as being a work for all now I just must reevaluate that enthusiasm. There are many
ways to copyright and protect a document, I just have a hard time with only one addict holding all
the cards even if that addict is completely committed and true to purpose.
Love and Recovery,
Dan S.

25 May 1998
Dear Dan,
Yeah, me too. I knew from the beginning that this would not be easy and have always stood
ready to protect the work as written and approved by the members of NA. This means I may
have to look awkward, go through unfair criticism, whatever, especially since the observer may
not know all the factors in play at the time.
If this minor tremor dismays you, you may want to stay away until all the work is done because
this requires courage and the vision that only a loving God can give. My first sponsor, who died
clean after 35 years, told me you have to get a rhinoceros hide to do NA service!
I hear your pain and all I can say is that it is shared. The important thing is that we have come so
far. Members all over the planet can access, download, input, and discuss the work over a period
of time without one singly long distance call or postal charge! We are just as committed as always
and will need help and manpower to handle the editing as more members find out about this. I
will try to keep viewers informed without making anyone look bad.
As the originator, my holding of copyrights for the NA Foundation is legal and straightforward.
We were at a crisis where some members wanted to take the work from us and give it to WSO.
We have dealt with all this as quietly and considerately as possible without jeopardizing the
project.
If you read the Preface and Introduction slowly, as well as the other Foundation papers. You will
notice that we state, "when the work begins to succeed, we will be approached by 'strange
emissaries' who would like to take it from us." Well, the emissaries have showed themselves and
I want you to know that our commitment to doing this work, preserving it as a non-commercial
writing by addicts for addicts is as strong now as ever.
In Loving, Respectful, Service,
Bo S.

26 May 1998
In talking with different members, it has become very clear to me that what has become
important to many is not the book itself, not the message it caries, not the people involved, or
even the recovery process itself. What seems to have become the REAL issue for them is to
have this work drawn into the rigid structure that so many have mistaken for N.A. It is as if these
members can not keep themselves in line with the spirit of the work. They seem to fear
overstepping the imaginary boundaries they have created to hold the spirit of recovery inbound. It
is as if they fear freedom itself and require laws both written and imaginary to keep themselves
and those around them in check.
Sometime back, my Home Group found itself homeless when the office of a certain treatment
program closed. We decided that we did not want to move into another place such as a church or
treatment center and since the group could afford to rent a place, several members started to look
around for something affordable. A couple of members found a place at a very reasonable price
that would more than meet the needs of the Group. After looking at the, place the person
showing it informed the members that if they intended to rent it, that he would need ONE
PERSON to sign the lease. He would have to do both a reference and credit check on that person
and this individual would be personally responsible for both damages and rent. One of the
members present chose to accept that responsibility and to put the lease in his name. Nobody in
our group had a problem with this for several reasons:
(1) The group needed a regular place to meet. Without a meeting place how could
the addict seeking recovery even find us?
(2) Without an individual to lease the property there was no chance of renting it by
the Group.
(3) We TRUST this member. He has served our group and the fellowship in
MANY ways for MANY years. Nobody feels that he wants the place for any
personal gain. If anything, he COULD live without this responsibility if he
did not have love and concern for his Home Group. Does the circumstance
mean that our group is no longer an NA Group? Should we NOT meet there,
or pay the rent because an individual holds the lease and not the group? I
understand that this is not the way that most groups would do things. I also
know that if we had taken the time to debate the issue we might very well be
homeless. We do have the right to be autonomous, and to do things in the
way that works best for us. THERE ARE NO MUST IN N.A. and as long as
the ties that bind us. . .
Thanks For Listening,
Steve S.

27 May 1998
While it easy to sit and wax poetically about the reasons we should or should not copyright this as
an individual. What I hear is that it is being done out of a fear based paranoid delusion that the
'boogie man' is out to get me. I used to live this way and found that it is a discomforting way to
live, through NA I have found a better way to live. I believe that a loving God will work through
others. Maybe he is showing someone that is trying with all their might to have their done that
the work of a loving God will shine through in the end.
In Loving service,
Tom B.

29 May 1998
That sounds good to me!
Bo

29 May 1998
A year or so ago I had a sponsee who came to me asking what to do about a personal problem he
had going on his life. It concerned making a trip out of town to one of his old playgrounds and
being around people who would be using. He had made these plans long before he got clean but
only had a couple of months in the program at that time. He had also invested quiet a sum of
money into this trip beforehand that would be lost should he decide not go. As we talked I
discovered that this type of trip had always played an important role in his active addiction. I
honestly felt like he would be making a mistake if he took this trip and told him so. He explained
to me that he knew he could not use, and that he had no desire to go back to his old way of life.
He rationalized that he had changed and that he had already given up all of his past with the
exception of this one thing and he did not understand why I could not be more open-minded
about it. When I stood fast on the matter, he started attacking my recovery and me. He said I
had my own issues and that my own fear was why I wanted to control the situation. He said that
I was just being paranoid, and unwilling to trust God. That he had a working relationship with his
higher power and that he could not live in a bubble for the rest of his life. Well, to make a long
story short he went on the trip and showed up at my house the next day loaded. Did this mean he
was not working a program? Did it mean his Higher Power had failed him? I do not think so. He
just had not experienced these things and did not understand how it could effect him. He had no
frame of reference to relate to and when he came to me he was unwilling to draw off my
experience. Why was this? He WANTED the reality of the situation to be different. He had
forgotten one very important principal openmindedness. He remained in active addiction and is
now in prison on drug charges.
STEVE S.

30 May 1998
Thanks Steve!
As I read your article, it made me look back on my personal recovery. Until I came to a place to
completely surrender and turn my will over to a HP did I experience the serenity that is discussed
in this program. It was like swimming upstream until I surrendered and let the current carry me.
The open mindedness has to be there for the freedom of a HP to operate. A sponsor can not help
a sponsee that knows more than the teacher. It is painful to see so many addicts in early recovery
and old timers that arrive at what they consider the perfect stopping point in their recovery. At
that point, we began to regress than progress. I was very fortunate this past week to spent time
with an addict with 74 days clean. This individual before their relapse had 20 + years clean. The
whole time, he kept telling me "Charlie, just keep it simple". How many times do we complicate
the hell out of something so simple! As I reflect back on my personal recovery, I see times of
hard headedness but during those times, I experienced my toughest times because I was not
willing to listen, like the person you just shared about. Not many people go through tests like this
and stay clean. Today I listen to the old timers and draw from their experience. Please keep your
program simple. If you are going through hard times, do not try to walk through it by yourself.
You can consider yourself lucky if you make it through the test by yourself. You may not be as
lucky as my friend with 20 + years and make it back to the meetings or like Steve's friend and end
up in prison. Remember, if we continue doing the same shit do not expect different results, it
does not happen!
ILS,
Charles M.

30 May 1998
It seems that all the controversy surrounding "the copyright" is accomplishing exactly what it is
designed to do in my opinion - To distract addicts from becoming involved with the wonderful
opportunity that exists of truly becoming "a part of". We have been offered the amazing
opportunity of being a part of a history-making project that potentially can affect so many lives,
just as the authors of the Basic Text gave each of us. I have been taught in the fellowship that I
have to give away what I have in order to keep it. What we do only becomes real when we share
it. This is my breakthrough of my attitude that what I can contribute may not be of any import or
lasting value, and I am reminded that these evaluations are not mine to make. I was told to be
open-minded and listen to all, take what I needed, and leave the rest. Thank God, that I didn't
ignore or choose to forget the stuff that I didn't consider necessary at the moment, because some
of those things have definitely restored this addict to sanity on more than one occasion. I was told
that if I was personally unable or unwilling to be part of the solution then I should at least be
aware of my defects and try not to add to the problem. In closing, I don't believe that the issue is
"who holds the copy right - rather - WHO'S WILLING TO BE INVOLVED"
ILS,
Gayle H., Georgia

15 Jun 1998
Hello Family,
In response to the previous posts, I felt that I needed to respond. Having been with Bo since the
start of all the commotion and through the firestorms, I need to express my feelings. Tom, I can
understand where you are coming from but if you are like most addicts in NA, you cringe every
time World Service puts out a motion to change the Basic Text. I know I do. In 10 years time,
you may not even fine one original word of the original document. In response to the copyright of
the material, I have to agree with Bo. How would you like it if you spent time and money out of
your own pocket to write a book. You turned it over to a fellowship that you trusted and when
they finished with their editing, you could not find any of your contributions left in the book. To
make it worse, they turned around and sold you back the book you had just written! I would be
pissed! The copyrighting of the book is to protect it. If you would like to discuss the issue
further, feel free to e-mail me at [email protected].
ILS,
Charles M.

15 Jun 1998
I have been affiliated with Bo S. for 18 years. During that time, we have done much service work.
Real Service work. We have not been paid. We have not had WSO credit cards to pay our bills.
We have not had WSO paychecks to buy our meals or pay our rent. All service performed has
been for the love of NA, which is two (or more) addicts staying clean. 'All else is not NA'.
What was done with the copyright of the book was to protect it. In 1982, we did not do what Bo
has done now, which is basic street "Cover your ass" methodology. We acted in a spirit of faith
and trust in WSO.
Faith and trust in WSO got our book changed. Faith and trust in WSO got our traditions
rewritten. Faith and trust in WSO got us "The Twelve Concepts". Faith and trust in WSO got us
WSO appointed delegates instead of RSRs carrying a group conscience. My faith and trust are
now where they belong, in the hands of my higher power, not the WSO.
Any one who believes anything the WSO says or stands for is a fool. What have they done for
you? If you can answer with any response besides "Nothing", you better examine your motives
and ask your self "Why?" because you are in the process of being conned.
What has Bo done for you? How about, ah let me see, its difficult, because Bo is such a bum and
a thief and a con, let me see, well, how about we start with a Basic Text? Without Bo, there
would be no text. How about before the text? Well again its very difficult, because again Bo
blah, blah, blah, but how about the Oldest NA clubhouse in the world? The Rising Sun
Clubhouse at 890 Atlanta Rd. in Marietta GA? How about five year of service on the BOT when
the BOT had a chance of being something? All that was paid to Bo during that time was travel
expenses. How about countless meetings, countless sponsees, countless leads, Area Service
Committee meetings, Regional Service Committee meetings, and World Service Conferences?
ALL FOR NO PAY. How much does George Holleran make? I bet he will not tell you. He has
not had gainful employment since the WSC in 1983 when he was hired by the WSO. NA (two
addicts staying clean) has been paying George's and other NA members salary for many years.
NA has never paid Bo a dime. You better get right, remember where you came from, and look at
who is doing what to who and why.
Money, property, and prestige a.k.a. sex, security, and society. Who is getting these things? Let
me see, is it Bo, or maybe is it George Holleran? That's really a hard one, let me see, who gets all
expenses paid trips to all major Fellowship (not NA, because NA is two addicts staying clean)
functions. You know, I do not think Bo gets his expenses paid.
You people who do not trust Bo are obviously stupid. Therefore, I am wasting my time with
further explanations. You are the dictionary definition of an idiot, which is "A mentally deficient
person with intelligence in the lowest measurable range, being unable to guard against common
dangers..."
God Bless NA (two addicts staying clean)
Page C.

16 Jun 1998
Page,
You seem a bit bitter and you seem to be taking this personally. I mean, what is wrong with
sharing our concerns?
Jesse F.

16 Jun 1998
Dear Page,
You may not remember me but back around 1983 several of us from N. Ga. started attending
Area meetings at the Rising Sun before we formed the N.W. Ga. Area. Then once we started
going to region. You were there most of the time too. Most of us that were around at that time
doing service KNOW what is going on and have very little trouble seeing the whole picture. I was
very grateful to find your post here. Those of us who know and trust Bo need to let others know
where we stand. Like many others who have done service over the years, W.S.O. has given me a
real picture of what N.A. is NOT. N.A. is NOT the service structure. I have written several
things in regards to this that are here in the Quest Section. I hope you will check it out. Anyway,
I was glad to hear the things you had to share. I know you are about as sick as I am of being
accused of living in fear or resentment simply because you want to speak the truth about your
service experience. Just keep the faith, and know you are not alone.
Love & Fellowship,
STEVE S.

20 Jun 1998
Well Put Page!
Thank you for having the guts to say what a lot of us feel! Long live, the real NA (two addicts
helping each other).
ILS,
Chuck S.

IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF NA AND WOULD LIKE TO CONTRIBUTE YOUR COMMENTS,
PLEASE DO SO BY WAY OF THE QUEST FORUM.
[Related material will be composed and displayed here in a series of topic related articles. - Ed.]

hits in 1999!

Home

Reprinted from the 
Narcotics Anonymous Way of Life
2003 Form and the 2006 Form being edited on this site.

N.A. FELLOWSHIP USE ONLY
Copyright � December 1998
Victor Hugo Sewell, Jr.

N.A. Foundation Group
2692 Whitehurst Drive NE
Marietta, Georgia 30062
[email protected]

gratefully powered by ezweb.net

All rights reserved. This draft may be copied by members of Narcotics Anonymous for the purpose of writing input for future drafts, enhancing the recovery of NA members and for the general welfare of the Narcotics Anonymous Fellowship as a whole. The use of an individual name is simply a registration requirement of the Library of Congress and not a departure from the spirit or letter of the Pledge, Preface or Introduction of this book. Any reproduction by individuals or organizations outside the Fellowship of Narcotics Anonymous is prohibited. Any reproduction of this document for personal or corporate monetary gain is prohibited.

Last update September 29, 2005