# Paph thaianum



## Eric Muehlbauer (Dec 20, 2006)

Guido (and others), what is your take on P. thaianum? I just heard about it today...I can't access the description (I think its in the Orchid Review) but from the pictures I have seen it seems basically like a very small niveum...not seeing the description, I don't know what taxonomic features are supposed to distinguish it. Take care, and have a great holiday! Eric


----------



## ORG (Dec 22, 2006)

DEar Eric,
this species is really distinct enough to be an own species.
I could mail you the description when you want

Best greetings

Olaf


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Dec 22, 2006)

Thanks! That would be great! Do you still have my email address? Better yet, can you send it to the group, as I'm sure everyone else is interested. Take care, Eric


----------



## lienluu (Dec 23, 2006)

In some ways, it seems to have more characterisics of a Parvi than a Brachy. It also appears to be the only Brachy species so far with a thin, inflated pouch.


----------



## ORG (Dec 23, 2006)

Dear Lien,
thanks that you have published the description. When I mailed the last time it was later then 3 o'clock in the morning and time to go sleep. So I could not show the description so immediately like Chien

Best greetings

Olaf


----------



## Heather (Dec 23, 2006)

I have received a request from Dr. Iamwiriyakul to delete his description charging that it violates copyright law.

Any comments, advice, or opinions would be most appreciated...


----------



## paphjoint (Dec 23, 2006)

I agree - I does violates copyrights - at least the Orchid review's copyright - And Lienluu should have asked the author - 

This is BAD MANNERS !!!


----------



## ORG (Dec 23, 2006)

I agree also,
it is the best to delete this part. All interested persons had the possibility now to get the information.
We must be more careful in the future with the copyright.

Best greetings

Olaf


----------



## Heather (Dec 23, 2006)

Very good. Since Lien is on a plane all day, and I don't want to be included in any lawsuits, I will delete the post of the description and forward along most sincere apologies. 

Carry on...


----------



## gonewild (Dec 23, 2006)

I have a question...

Why does the author of a scientific paper object to it being copied for public use?

I can understand why the journal it was published in would want to protect it's sales value but it seems like the author would want the description to receive as mush exposure as possible.

Does this mean the description of a new species is only available to persons who subscribe to a commercial publication?

I'm not criticizing the author, but rather asking if this is standard procedure.


----------



## kentuckiense (Dec 23, 2006)

gonewild said:


> I have a question...
> 
> Why does the author of a scientific paper object to it being copied for public use?
> 
> ...



Yeah, what Lance said.


----------



## Heather (Dec 23, 2006)

Well, I asked Brian the same thing earlier. I mean, Olaf had mentioned he could mail the description out. How, since the article was credited and cited, is posting it online really different from disseminating it another way?


----------



## gonewild (Dec 23, 2006)

Heather said:


> Well, I asked Brian the same thing earlier. I mean, Olaf had mentioned he could mail the description out. How, since the article was credited and cited, is posting it online really different from disseminating it another way?



Yes, how is it? 
How is it different from posting a page from a magazine on a physical bulletin board in a lobby?


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Dec 23, 2006)

Well, the reason i posted this note is because I couldn't get any info from the Orchid review. The article was listed, but not highlighted...most articles could be read, but not the one describing thaianum.....the journal's decision or the author's decision? Take care, Eric


----------



## ORG (Dec 23, 2006)

Dear all,
it is always the decision of he publisher if an article shall be shown in the net or another journal. You must understand also that the journals don't like this way because they want sell also their product and it is very expensive to produce a good orchidjournal.
When I would send privately one copy of an article to a friend there is no problem or when I would publish a comprehension of my own article.
Please respect the decision of the publisher and the writer.

Best greetings and merry christmas

Olaf


----------



## John M (Dec 25, 2006)

Does anyone have photos of this new species? 

I have a micro Paph. niveum that I've grown since I was a kid. I bought it in the early 80's. It blooms on mature growths with only a 2 to 3 inch leafspan. The flowers are tiny, very cupped and quite fragrant (similar to the smell of Cattleya jenmanii, or, some say Juicyfruit gum). I was told about 20 years ago that it might be a new species; but, I never did anything about looking into that any further. It got big enough at one point to fill a 6 inch pot with dozens of growths. Unfortunately, I became ill in the 90's and nearly killed the plant. I have recovered from my illness and managed to save a small piece of this plant. It currently has two growths, each with a 1 inch leafspan. It is currently in active growth. I expect it to bloom sometime next year. I'd love to learn more about this *new* species "thaianum" and especially, I'd like to see a photo. Can anyone help? Thanks.


----------



## ORG (Dec 25, 2006)

Dear John,
when you mail me your mailadress then I will mail you a picture which I get from China, where this species is cultivated also

Best greetings

Olaf


----------



## Braem (Dec 25, 2006)

Ok ... here some answers

1)_ P. thaianum _is (as Olaf says) different enough to be accepted as a good species. (that is judging from the publication, I have not seen any plants).
2) The publication was done in a public journal - _The Orchid Review. _The copyright to the format is with _The Orchid Review._ The text is public knowledge. The only people that could object is the RHS (who own the copyright to the OR) for scanning and putting the article on this site. But they won't.
3) If Dr. Iamwiryakul wants to go to court, wish him good luck. Anyone has the right to make a fool of himself. 

regards
Guido J. Braem



Heather said:


> I have received a request from Dr. Iamwiriyakul to delete his description charging that it violates copyright law.
> 
> Any comments, advice, or opinions would be most appreciated...


----------



## Braem (Dec 25, 2006)

Sorry, but that is not quite correct. We are paying fees for reproduction with every equipment we buy (Photocopyers, scanners, computer software, and computer hardware [some may not notice, but we are paying]). And this is not a commercial site. You can only ask for damages if there have been damages. Has the author been "damaged" because his article was put on the internet? NO. Surely not. To the contrary. His work is made known. His vanity claim is completely counter productive. If the author would not want anyone to know that he published the species, why did he publish it?

The only copyright that was infringed here is the copyright of the _Orchid Review._ And that copyright is only enforcable in respect to the format of the articel, not the content. Of course one could argue that RHS wants to sell _Orchid Review_ and that is certainly correct. However, they would have to proof that someone would have subscribed OR if the article would not have been put on the internet. Even if they could, the cost would be enormous and their reputation would be mindered. And if they did, all what is to do is to sacn the article in a WORD format [I just go a magnificent software that does just that] and put it the text on the internet in Word Format.

The situation is different with "larger" parts of books. And there again, it is a matter of opinion and a matter of how one does it. And again, a matter of whether damage is done. 

For articles, it is completely sufficient if one gives proper credit in those cases, and in a scan that is done, as it shows the author and it shows the name of the journal. But Beware: only for _non-commercial _purposes!!

As far as "bad manners" is concerned, people screaming "bad manners" should check whether they are not sitting in a glass building before throwing stones.

Guido J. Braem




ORG said:


> I agree also,
> it is the best to delete this part. All interested persons had the possibility now to get the information.
> We must be more careful in the future with the copyright.
> 
> ...


----------



## paphjoint (Dec 25, 2006)

Oh Yes ? 
Ok so what's good in subscribing to orchid magazines if you can just download the articles a few month later on the internet? 

How foolish can you be ? 





Braem said:


> As far as "bad manners" is concerned, people screaming "bad manners" should check whether they are not sitting in a glass building before throwing stones.
> 
> Guido J. Braem


----------



## Braem (Dec 26, 2006)

I was the publisher of _Schlechteriana._ In the best days, 130 people subscribed. But eveyone wanted it for free. Including certain people in Paris.

The same happens to each and every journal.

But as far as what we are talking about, this does not matter. As I have explained, the people who ask for a scan of a certain article have no intention whatsoever to subscribe to any journal. The same for books. I have never refused to share pages out of my books on the internet. What do you want us authors to do if someone asks for information? Do you want us to say: "I am not telling you, go buy my book" or do you want us to say "Well, I could scan it for you, but I wont, go subscribe". If we did so, you would be the first to yell:"Arrogant" "Scandal" etc. (and in fact, you did so repeatedly. You were one of the people that demanded that I and all those working with me were not to be asked to speak in Dijon and on other occasions). 

Just try to use your brain. Sometimes it helps. 

And people should know that I post this answer for the sake of other people. Mr. Paphjoint surely does not mention that he was kicked off from another forum for claiming that I was a thief and never responding to my demand for proof. So far for the "Good Manners" of Mr. Uri Baruk alias Paphjoint.

And this may also give an idea why I do only participate in forums sporadically. Most people want my expertise, but they don't want my opinion. Sorry, the one does not go without the other.

But you are right. How foolish can I be when I keep offering my help and experise in spite people such as Mr. Baruk and get kicked in the .... for it.

Prof. Braem





paphjoint said:


> Oh Yes ?
> Ok so what's good in subscribing to orchid magazines if you can just download the articles a few month later on the internet?
> 
> How foolish can you be ?


----------



## Heather (Dec 26, 2006)

FWIW, Lien had permission from Orchid Review to share that article. 

Now, I hope we can get back to the actual point of this thread and quit with the accusations on all sides. Please. 

Peace!


----------



## paphjoint (Dec 26, 2006)

Come on my old friend - once again you're not telling the thruth ,

I left the ogd for the same reason as did Dr Joseph Arditti- that is because of you - I was not kicked off - just ask Kenneth 

- whereas to your babbling about Dijon I do not have the slightest idea of what you're talking about - you must be into another paranoia trip - take your pills man, take your pills. 




Braem said:


> I was the publisher of _Schlechteriana._ In the best days, 130 people subscribed. But eveyone wanted it for free. Including certain people in Paris.
> 
> The same happens to each and every journal.
> 
> ...


----------



## Heather (Dec 26, 2006)

All right. 
Both of you. Uri and Guido - take it private, don't bring your old feud to this forum please. 

No more name calling or character defamation.
You've been warned, and I'm getting weary of having to warn people in these taxonomy threads. The discussions have been valuable to other forum members, I hope we can continue them, but leave the personal B.S. out of it. (I'm speaking to everyone here...)


----------



## NYEric (Dec 26, 2006)

Yay! I love a strong woman.


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Dec 26, 2006)

I gotta go with Heather on this.

To the general public:
I realize not everyone can get along on a personal level, but please keep the disagreements constructive and focused on the subject at hand. Disagreements about how to classify a plant can be very valuable and give multiple viewpoints for everyone to see a bigger picture from. But, disagreements based on bad blood or general dislike for someone help no one...no matter how true and/or contructively said those criticisms might be. Making others look bad makes you look bad, and I don't want anyone looking bad here. You are free to announce your disagreements with eachother by Personal Messages, and if that doesn't resolve it, nothing probably will so feel free to add the other person to your ignore list. If you do it in public view, then we have to do something about it, and I KNOW none of us wants to make any decisions like that again.

To Guido and Uri:
I really value both of your opinions, experiences, expertises, and time on this forum. I personally am very proud to have you both posting on here! I won't ask you guys to bury the hatchet or anything like that, but please do your best to keep your posts about the topics and not about eachother. That's all I ask.

Jon


----------



## tim (Jan 4, 2007)

*Paph thaianum image*

fyi:

click here

hope this helps....I think this looks like a natural hybrid...that niveum staminode is quite obvious, and reminiscent of other things (Albion comes to mind...)

-tim


----------



## ORG (Jan 5, 2007)

Dear Tim,
Paph. thaianum is smaller than all the other related species and typical for this species are the big points inside the lip.
Can you tell me which other species would produce together with niveum so a plant.

I think it is really a distinct species. But let us see more plants in flower then you will change also your mind.

Best greetings

Olaf


----------



## slippertalker (Jan 5, 2007)

I agree with Olaf, what species located in Thailand would produce such a hybrid with niveum? The morphology of the flowers does show a relationship with niveum, but this could easily just be a close relative. I would like to see a population of these plants to determine if this clone is typical or an aberration.


----------



## VAAlbert (Jan 8, 2007)

tim said:


> fyi:
> 
> click here
> 
> ...



It does have a funny staminode...


----------

