miércoles, 27 de mayo de 2009


Beloved Osho Lovers & Friends: This Osho Meditation Intensive will be presented by Ma Dharm Joti, author of the world famous book, One Hundred Tales for Ten Thousand Buddhas. This delightful and fascinating book is about her experiences traveling with Osho through India in the early days. It is a collection of living moments with the living Buddha. Ma Dharm Jyoti accompanied Osho in the very early days when Osho left being a university professor, and traveled around India giving talks to thousands of seekers. These are the tales of those days. Ma Dharm Joti is also closely connected with OshoWorld.com which, as many of you know, provided us all with Osho's discourses FREE of charge for many years until they were prevented from doing so recently by the dastardly Osho International Foundation. I will support and attend this event in Portland, Oregon, USA, July 10-12. The Friday night 1-1/2 hour kick-off of the 3-day event is FREE! The cost for the Saturday and Sunday intensive is $80, which is not set in store if money is an issue for you. The event includes the main meal each day, some snacks and tea. It will be held in a gorgeous location and will be coordinated by Ma Anand Arupo, who I assure you knows how to make events like this happen with expertise, flare and grace. Overnight sleeping-bag accommodations will be possible for $20 more. It's my dream for my up-and-coming Yahoo!group, RiverIIOsho, to have 10,000 members by Osho's birthday, 12/11. With 210 active members currently, we are well on our way! Join us NOW and help us make it so. All Osho lovers and friends are heartily welcome! Send me your email address and I'll send you a personal invitation. Or simply join at
Peace, Love, & Blissfulness, Swami Amrit Subhuti
Rajneesh, Oregon USA ps: One Hundred Tales for Ten Thousand Buddhas by Ma Dharm Joti, is now available on-line, FREE of charge, at http://www.oshoworld.com/tales/introduction.asp

Portland USA
July 10-12 An invitation to explore a new way of life. Each moment in our lives, we are at a crossroad: between unawareness and awareness, between being absent or being present. The mindlives in a sort of sleep.
Friday evening no cost: 7pm-8:30pm

Introduction, Osho meditation, singing and dancing

Saturday: 8am-8pm Sunday: 8am-4pm

In this weekend intensive, we will have another look at our lives and will experiment with some of the choosen techniques devised by Osho to rediscover our real being in its innocence and purity. Finding our real being is the greatest achievement in spirituality, then each moment is celebration. Let us meditate and celebrate together.


Saturday and Sunday: $80 includes the main meal each day, some snacks, tea and water. Possible to bring a sleeping bag and spend the night Saturday for an additional $20. Price adjustments are possible.
Arupo 503.493.9043 Sarbjit 503.519.8199

The Little Church, 5138 NE 23rd Ave (just north of Alberta), Portland, OR 97211 Ma Dharm Jyoti
Ma Dharm Jyoti is one of Osho's first disciples during his time in Bombay. She is the author of the internationally renowned book, One Hundred Tales for Ten Thousand Buddhas. She has been traveling all over the world leading meditation camps and groups.

domingo, 24 de mayo de 2009



Ma Gyan Darshana





Ma Gyan Darshana


No lo compartan, elimínenlo
Ma Gyan Darshana

domingo, 17 de mayo de 2009

Founder of Sannyasnews dies

Pari (left) in a 2002 Sannyasnews editorial meeting
The main founder of the Sannyasnews website, Swami Paritosh (Chris Gray), usually known as Pari, and who for writing purposes used the pseudonym “Sam”, died in the London Hampstead Marie Curie Hospice (Eden Hall) last Thursday morning (May 14th). He had put up a brave struggle with cancer over the last 12 months. He was 67.
Pari had been an anarchist in his early life, in a wild, sixties Notting Hill Gate, of which he still spoke with affection. During that time he translated a seminal anarchist work from the French, called “Leaving the 20th Century”. However at some point he found himself reading Ouspensky and it turned his life for ever. He found his way to Poona in the early days, after a long courtship of Buddhism and the vipassana technique. Osho made him lead the first (Sannyas) Vipassana groups in 1975, and there is an exchange with Osho recorded on page 375 to 377 of the darshan diary “Hammer on the Rock” about vipassana.
However after a short while he found the leadership role absurd, and left the mainstream ashram to live a street or so away, and, as he always seemed to do, in fastidiously clean and attractive apartments, even if sometimes they were squats. The typewriter was always at the ready, and books and paints to hand. When Poona one ended in 1981, he felt at the time neo-sannyas had ended, and returned to London and withdrew into family life, holding that sannyas had been overtaken by dictatorship, and lost its way.
His reaction to the end of Rajneeshpuram in 1975 was almost the opposite of what many did, he felt that somehow Osho had reasserted himself, and a lot of hopeless sheep had rushed out of the fold, and he was going back in. For him optimism arose, and he began to move in sannyas circles once more, and returned to Poona and to Osho. He was in Poona when Osho died.
Much of the material that relates to Poona one and to Poona two is tellingly recorded with a fine sense of movement in his book “Life of Osho” (by Sam) published in 1997. Of course it is from the perspective of someone who sometimes projected that the whole sannyas movement reflected his own, but of that world his writing is amongst the very best.
Pari did many things with his life, he returned for example to leading Osho meditations in the nineties in Swiss Cottage, London, and also in some famous back garden meditation events in Eton Avenue, of which I myself still have fond memories. He explored in an intense way the role of hallucinogens in psychotherapy and mystical life (written up in his recently published book “The Acid” ). He started, with Usha his beloved, the first satsang circle in London (inspired by the visit of Satyam Nadeen in 1999, who strongly encouraged this model of satsang). And he was an excellent and studied carpenter and gardener.
It is difficult to say what any man’s life means. Pari lived his life passionately, took his own self examination to the limits, and loved and lived well. He could be difficult, and cussed. He could sometimes sweetly confess to loneliness. But somehow he “made” his life, sometimes against the odds, and it marked him out.
We add the links below to some of his articles on Sannyasnews.com from the earlier days of the site.
Koregaon Park – The Wilder Shores
GokarnPoona 2001
Ayahuasca CeremonyOsho Bardo

sábado, 16 de mayo de 2009

Osho: Ahora en Occidente es imposible acercarte hombre a hombre. Has de utilizar los medios de comunicación.

ahora en Occidente es imposible acercarte hombre a hombre. Has de utilizar los medios de comunicación. En tiempos de Buda era totalmente distinto; Buda se desplazaba y la gente se encontraba cara a cara con él; no existían periódicos, ni radio, ni televisión. Pero ahora tratar a la gente cara a cara es imposible, particularmente en Occidente, a menos que utilices los medios de comunicación. Y cuando utili­zas los medios de comunicación, evidentemente parece que la meditación sea también un artículo vendible. Has de utilizar los mis­mos términos, has de utilizar el mismo lenguaje, has de persuadir a la gente de la misma forma que los demás les están convencien­do de otras cosas. Si les dices que esta meditación es lo máximo en meditaciones, les parecerá comercial, porque hay muchos que se lo están diciendo. Dicen respecto a los jabones, "Es lo mejor en jabones, lo mejor en perfumes". Hay perfumes llamados "éxta­sis". Antes o después alguien va a bautizar a su perfume como "satori" o "samadhi". Has de utilizar los mismos términos, el mismo lenguaje; no hay otra forma. Has de utilizar los mismos métodos, pero en ello no hay nada malo.
He estado en las montañas y he regresado al mercado. ¿No puedes ver la botella de vino en mis manos? Ahora estoy en el mercado. Has de ser atrevido. Ve y utiliza todos los medios a tu alcance. No puedes actuar como Buda, no puedes actuar como Jesús; esos días se han acabado. Si sigues actuando así, entonces tardarás millones de años en divulgar las noticias. Para cuando éstas lleguen a la gente, ya no tendrán vida. Así que mientras los copos de maíz están frescos, date prisa; llega a la gente.
Osho- Yoga La Ciencia del Alma Vol. IV
Cap. La Alquimia de la Celebración

jueves, 14 de mayo de 2009

EL GRAN CORAJE DE LA VIDA valientes en el mundo debe tener las agallas para permanecer solo sin tener que preocuparse por la mayoría del mundo y cuál es su opinión. PERO ESTO ES POSIBLE SOLO CUANDO SU rebelde idea no ha tomado prestada, no es sólo un pensamiento en la mente pero es una realidad, una comprensión profunda de sus el propios en las cosas. SI SU AUTORIDAD SE en otro lugar, no se puede tener mucho coraje que. Si tu autoridad se encuentra dentro de ti, si crees que lo que están luchando por la VERDAD ES TU EXPERIENCIA - y que no es de destruir el mundo, pero para crear un mundo mejor, una mejor humanidad, mejores personas, mejores personas, mejores oportunidades de crecimiento para todos - entonces son la mayoría de UNO, Y TODO EL MUNDO ES LA MINORÍA DE CINCO MILLONES DE PERSONAS. Entonces no importa cuántas personas están en contra de ti. SI LA VERDAD ES TUYA, ENTONCES nada importa, sin vacilación alguna vez viene a ti, ni siquiera en tus sueños. Y cuando te digo esto a ti, lo digo desde mi propia experiencia. Ni por un momento he sido visitado por el pensamiento de que "Tal vez estoy solo, todo el mundo está contra mí; y todo el pasado, los millones y millones de personas - si estuviera vivo, que sería también contra mí. " Mi soledad nunca ha creado una única duda en mí, porque yo no soy nadie para luchar contra la verdad, yo estoy luchando por la VERDAD MI PROPIA EXPERIENCIA. Creo que en cada latido de mi corazón, que aun cuando el universo entero está contra mí, entonces demasiado seguiré siendo inquebrantable, inalteradas - por la sencilla razón de que la verdad está conmigo. Pueden ser una gran multitud, pero la verdad no está con ellos. Y la verdad es el poder real. La verdad es la semilla de la victoria final. Sin embargo puede tomar tiempo, pero la verdad va a ganar. Los Upanishads tienen una enorme hermosa declaración, satyame jayate - "LA VERDAD ES SIEMPRE victoriosa." Es posible que pueda tomar mucho tiempo - puede que no seas capaz de ver la victoria en tu propia vida ... tal vez tus hijos o los hijos de tus hijos. Pero un día, la VERDAD va a ganar.

Las mentiras pueden ganar pequeñas batallas aquí y allá - pero la victoria final va a ser de la verdad. Esta convicción no es una creencia. Si se trata de una creencia, que se inicia cuando se duda de que encontrarás la condena por todos lados, de todas partes. Esta verdad tiene que ser una CONDENA DE TU PROPIO SER. Entonces no importa - INCLUSO SI DIOS ANTES DE STANDS Y ESTÁ EN CONTRA DE USTED, no hará ningún cambio - pues la verdad es superior a cualquier HIPÓTESIS DE DIOS.

OSHO El Rebelde Capítulo # 30

Título del capítulo: La esclavitud del matrimonio [parte 2 de 6]

THE GREATEST COURAGEOUS LIFE in the world NEEDS TO HAVE THE GUTS TO STAND ALONE without ever bothering about the majority of the world and what their opinion is.

BUT THIS IS POSSIBLE ONLY WHEN YOUR REBELLIOUS IDEA IS not borrowed, is not only a thought in the mind but is a realization, A DEEP INSIGHT OF YOUR OWN INTO THINGS.IF YOUR AUTHORITY IS SOMEWHERE ELSE, YOU CANNOT HAVE THAT MUCH COURAGE. If your authority is within you, IF YOU FEEL THAT WHAT YOU ARE FIGHTING FOR IS YOUR EXPERIENCED TRUTH -- and that it is not to destroy the world, but to create a better world, a better humanity, better people, better individuals, better opportunities for growth for all -- then YOU ARE THE MAJORITY OF ONE, AND THE WHOLE WORLD IS THE MINORITY OF FIVE BILLION PEOPLE.

Then it does not matter how many people are against you. IF THE TRUTH IS YOURS, THEN NOTHING MATTERS; no wavering ever comes to you, not even in your dreams. And when I am saying this to you, I am saying this out of my own experience.

Not for a single moment have I been visited by the thought that "Perhaps I am alone, the whole world is against me; and the whole past, millions and millions of people -- if they were alive, they would also be against me." My being alone has never created a single doubt in me, because I am not fighting for anybody else's truth; I AM FIGHTING FOR MY OWN EXPERIENCED TRUTH.

I feel it in every beat of my heart, that EVEN IF THE WHOLE UNIVERSE IS AGAINST ME, THEN TOO I WILL REMAIN UNWAVERING, UNDISTURBED -- for the simple reason that TRUTH IS WITH ME. They may be a vast crowd, but truth is not with them. And TRUTH IS REAL POWER.

Truth is THE SEED OF FINAL VICTORY. However long it may take, but TRUTH IS GOING TO WIN. The Upanishads have a tremendously beautiful statement, satyame jayate -- "TRUTH IS ALWAYS VICTORIOUS."

It is possible IT MAY TAKE LONG TIME -- you may not be able to see the victory in your own life... perhaps your children, or your children's children. BUT ONE DAY, TRUTH IS GOING TO WIN. Lies can win small battles here and there -- but THE FINAL VICTORY is going to be of THE TRUTH.

This conviction is not a belief. If it is a belief, you will start doubting when you will encounter condemnation from every side, from everywhere. THIS TRUTH HAS TO BE A CONVICTION OF YOUR OWN BEING. Then it does not matter -- EVEN IF GOD STANDS BEFORE YOU AND IS AGAINST YOU, it will not make any change -- because TRUTH IS HIGHER THAN ANY HYPOTHESIS OF GOD.

OSHOThe Rebel Chapter #30

Chapter title: The slavery of marriage [part 2 of 6]

lunes, 11 de mayo de 2009

OshoEnergySharing: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=102382505829

Información básica
Interés común - Religión y espiritualidad
Namaste to all the Blessed OSHO Sannyasins , Lovers , Friends..........

Welcome To All.........
All Osho English and Hindi Discourses audio series for listening and downloading are freely available on internet through OshoWorld.com website server... but now a days we all are in trouble again.
Please remember these are those peoples who tried to kill OSHO with slow poison now they come back again in form of OIF( Osho International Foundation ) and at this time they also want to kill the availability of OSHO..... so please vote in favor of cancellation of copyright and trademark ..... and support ..... our Sanayaas future.... As you all are know that lots of videos related to Osho have been for no reason what so ever deleted from Youtube, Facebook, Orkut and many social networking and sharing site....
sharing the vision of Beloved OSHO is our Right and now this is the time to fight for our Rights......
Because Osho Everybody’s Birthright......
Please Support Osho World & OSHO Friends International ....And Go to there Website:http://www.oshofriendsinternational.com/
And PLease Vote ..To Poll....Q:
Do you agree and support Osho Friends to get trademarks of Osho and His meditations cancelled? Yes No Can't say PLz Vote In YES .....
And Kindly support by becoming members of Osho Friends International and please share your comments at http://oshofriendsinternational.com/forum/
goto that link and register yourself….Please do this ,
In Favor Of Bhagwaan, Osho World, Osho Friends International, every Osho Sannyasins , Lovers, Friends, and also Our Sanyaas Future..
All my loving friends what you want related to our beloved master please send your list on my email id....
I will send you cd\dvd anywhere in India and also upload on internet thus everybody who are in love with master can have master's voice and videos... I am not charging any money...
We just want to share the VISION of OSHO........
We have power of sannyaas and feel this energy now is the time to share this sannyas energy and spread the Fragrance of Beloved OSHO….FREE OF COST....
share everything ........
No-One Can stop us....Not Even OIF......
Thanks With our love and Gratitude..... to all Sannyasins and My Beloved Bhagwaan....
Just Mail me.... prateek_singhal22@yahoo.com
send something to 1 person that 1 person again send that thing to another one that another one send to next one .....
that’s our chain going....We called this OshoEnergySharing.....
I invite every Osho Sannyasins and Osho Lovers To Join This chain .......
Live with this Energy Of Sannyaas....
And Enjoy The Blessings Our Loving and Beloved Bhagwaan........
With love
Anand Prateek
Información de contacto
Dirección de correo electrónico:
Sitio web:
Oficina: In Heart Of Every Osho LOvers....
Lugar: Earth
New Delhi, India


www.oshoworld.com Los discursos de Osho libremente descargables no están disponibles temporalmente...

Queridos amigos,

Los discursos de Osho libremente descargables en audio y video en http://www.oshoworld.com/
no están disponibles temporalmente debido a la amenaza por la OIF, Zurich EE.UU. a nuestro servidor desde el 5 de mayo de 2009. Osho World está tomando las medidas necesarias para hacer posible la descarga libre de nuevo. Su apoyo es muy apreciado y necesario. Su apoyo será amablemente recibido por los miembros de Amigos de Osho Internacional, por favor comparta sus comentarios en http://oshofriendsinternational.com/forum
Para más información, visite

Dear Friends, The freely downloadable Osho audio-video discourses at http://www.oshoworld.com/ are temporarily unavailable due to threat by OIF, Zurich to our US server host from May 5, 2009.
Osho World is taking suitable steps for making the free downloads possible again. Your support is highly appreciated and needed. Kindly support by becoming members of Osho Friends International and please share your comments at http://oshofriendsinternational.com/forum
For more info visit

jueves, 7 de mayo de 2009

¿Qué es una marca? What is a Trademark?

¿Qué es una marca?
Hay mucha confusión en torno a esta cuestión dentro de la comunidad sannyas. Esta confusión se ha creado en parte por diversas reclamaciones que se están realizando acerca de lo que es una marca comercial y lo que hace. La verdad es que muy pocas personas, incluso muchos abogados, realmente entienden exactamente lo que es una marca, cómo funciona y cómo alguien llega a poseer el derecho a utilizarla, así que es muy fácil para las personas ser confundidas y engañadas. Vamos a comprender este problema mediante la búsqueda de respuestas a algunas preguntas básicas, que son las siguientes.

¿Cómo es una marca definida y explicada?
* Una marca es válida sólo si el propietario tiene el derecho exclusivo a utilizar la marca para determinados productos y servicios en el mercado.
¿Qué no es una marca?
* Si otras personas tienen los mismos derechos de uso de la palabra, símbolo, o la imagen, entonces la palabra, símbolo, o la imagen no puede ser una marca. La razón de esto es que si varias personas tienen derecho a usarla, la palabra, símbolo, imagen no puede decirle al público que los productos o servicios cumplen las normas de calidad de una sola fuente. Una marca no es principalmente un derecho de propiedad de una empresa.

¿Qué es una marca?
* El propósito de una marca es ante todo para proteger el derecho del público a saber acerca de la calidad. Una marca es una palabra, frase, símbolo o imagen que se utiliza en la comercialización de un producto o servicio. La marca que permita identificar el producto o servicio como procedente de una única fuente. Además, la propiedad de una marca no da la propiedad del contenido del producto o servicio.

¿La palabra Osho puede ser utilizado como una marca?
* Osho sólo puede ser una marca si una persona jurídica (empresa o persona) tiene el derecho legal para el control de todos los bienes y servicios relacionados con las enseñanzas de Osho a fin de que cada vez que el público ve "Osho" conectado a los bienes o servicios que se sabe que los productos o servicios proceden de una sola fuente y que la única fuente que garantiza una cierta calidad.
* Sin embargo, esa fuente no puede ser Osho, ya muchas otras personas además de Osho han sido implicados en la creación de bienes y servicios relacionados con su trabajo. Además, Osho nunca cedió sus derechos a nadie, por lo que si es la fuente de Osho, nadie es dueño de la marca.

¿Qué se está reclamado en virtud de Osho como una marca?
* Los libros y grabaciones de audio y vídeo. Además, todas las actividades de los centros Osho. Estas clases incluyen la meditación, las sesiones y eventos; la celebración de eventos, eventos musicales, grupos de períodos de sesiones; carrocería, restaurantes, libros de Osho, periódicos, revistas y cualquier otra actividad de negocios llevada a cabo bajo el nombre de Osho. También estamos hablando de todas las actividades de las personas incluidas clases, reuniones, espectáculos, seminarios, grupos, discos, vídeos, libros, etc que se comercializan con el nombre de Osho.

¿Quién reclama Osho como una marca?
* La entidad que está reclamando la propiedad de la marca de Osho (en la mayor parte del mundo) es Osho International Foundation (OIF), un pequeño grupo legal con sede en Zurich, Suiza, a pesar de que la OIF sólo tiene una dirección de correo allí. La meditación no son las actividades llevadas a cabo por la OIF en Zurich.

¿Es la reivindicación de Osho como una marca por la OIF válida?
* Con el fin de la OIF, Zurich a la propiedad de la marca se ha de afirmar que es la fuente de todos los bienes y servicios relacionados con el trabajo de Osho y que legalmente controla todos los productos y servicios producidos por los centros de Osho y las personas que utilizan "Osho ".
* OIF ha de reclamar legalmente el control de cada aspecto de la labor realizada utilizando el nombre de Osho. A la propiedad de la marca de Osho, la OIF tendría que ser capaz de garantizar al público que todos estos bienes y servicios que responden a una determinada calidad.
* Si no puede legalmente OIF controlar todos los centros de Osho y las personas que utilizan Osho, OIF si no es la fuente de los bienes y servicios producidos por los centros y las personas, la OIF y si no puede garantizar la calidad de todos los bienes y servicios de los centros y las personas de Osho, entonces Osho no puede ser una marca registrada de la OIF.
* Si los centros y las personas son independientes y producen sus propios bienes y servicios, entonces Osho es un término que indica una conexión con el nombre de Osho, pero nunca puede ser una marca para una empresa o persona.
* Al presentar el registro de una marca OIF no obtiene la propiedad de los bienes y servicios creados por los centros o particulares. Los propios centros y las personas que lo han creado y tendrán que ceder sus derechos a la OIF legalmente antes de la OIF pueda controlarlos. La OIF está esencialmente exigiendo que los centros que hacer, o, para ser exactos, está reclamando los centros y ya lo han hecho.

¿Por qué y para qué fin esencialmente Osho se reivindica como una marca?
* El problema de Osho como marca es esencialmente sobre el control de la independencia o de los centros de Osho y los individuos.

¿Osho nunca estuvo a favor de ejercer ese control?
* La idea de que el trabajo de Osho sea estrictamente controlada como una forma de comercialización es, sin duda, de algunas personas por la idea de la seguridad, pero ciertamente no es la de Osho.
* A la luz de las enseñanzas de Osho, por ejemplo, un control centralizado significa una "madre iglesia" que existen estrictamente todos los controles de los trabajos en torno a las enseñanzas de Osho, una madre iglesia que dicta el dogma y la doctrina, que interpreta la madre iglesia las enseñanzas de Osho en términos de pureza. Centros con licencia no se permitirían ningún producto o servicio sin recibir el permiso de la OIF, y teniendo en el servicio o producto aprobado para su "pureza".

¿Cómo ayuda o lastima seguir esto en el caso de centros de la OIF?
* Mientras que algunos centros individuales están dispuestos a defender a la OIF y de insistir en que se mantiene independiente, como Osho ha pedido que sean, la OIF no es probable que prevalezca en reclamar la propiedad de los derechos exclusivos de uso como marca de Osho. Incluso si una marca comercial es propiedad de la OIF, los centros pueden optar por seguir siendo independientes.
* El peligro es que los centros que cooperan con la OIF y el apoyo de la reclamación de la OIF a la propiedad de una marca, o que no se opone cuando están informados de lo que está reclamando la OIF, acabará jurídico y financiero controlado por la OIF. Los centros que de pie a la OIF puede seguir siendo independiente.
* La elección de acuerdo a si debe ser jurídica y económicamente controlada por la OIF corresponde a cada centro.

¿Cuáles son las directrices de Osho? ¿Cómo ver que sus palabras y meditaciones llegar a la gente?
* Aquí están las propias palabras de Osho dando un mensaje claro:
"Yo no puedo verte dependiente. Yo no puedo verlos siendo acosados, torturados, ordenado, a obedecer-no. Por lo tanto, yo os digo: Mi forma de vida no es una religión. Es sin duda una especie de religiosidad. Para ser religioso sin estar conectado a una religión es la más hermosa experiencia de vida. A continuación, la religiosidad es una cualidad, no una fe ".
OSHO De la servidumbre a la Libertad, Capítulo 15, la pregunta 2
“I cannot see you dependent. I cannot see you being harassed, tortured, ordered, made to obey—no. Hence, I say to you: My way of life is not a religion. It is certainly a kind of religiousness. To be religious without being attached to a religion is the most beautiful experience of life. Then religiousness is a quality, not a faith”.
From Bondage to Freedom, Chapter 15, Question 2
"El mundo será sede de la publicación de mis libros, harán la realización de mis cintas, cintas de vídeo, se hace todo tipo de trabajo. Pero no tiene dominio sobre alguien. Todos las comunas del mundo son independientes. Todos los centros del mundo son absolutamente libres. Están bajo la guía de nadie. Mi sannyasins están directamente relacionadas con mi persona. La sede mundial tiene una función simplemente para que tú puedas tener una relación conmigo. En caso contrario, no tienen ningún lugar al que pedir a donde estoy, lo que me está sucediendo a mí. La sede mundial no es en modo alguno un poder sobre cualquier sannyasin, sobre cualquier otro centros sannyas, ashramas, comunas. No tiene nada que ver con eso. Es mi secretaría. Y su función es transmitirme los mensajes de importancia para mi y que transmita a los sannyasins mis mensajes de importancia para alguien. No se trata de una organización. No se trata de una estructura. Es simplemente una oficina funcional ".
OSHO The Last Testament, Vol. 5, Chapter 12
“The world headquarters will be publishing my books, will be releasing my tapes, videotapes, will be doing every kind of work. But it has no domination over anybody. All communes of the world are independent. All centers of the world are absolutely free. They are under nobody’s guidance. My sannyasins are directly related to me. The world headquarters will simply function so that you can have a connection with me. Otherwise you don’t have any place to whom to ask where I am, what is happening to me. The world headquarters is not in any way a power over any sannyasin, over any other sannyas centers, ashramas, communes. It has nothing to do with that. It is my secretariat. And its function is to convey to me messages of importance and to convey to the sannyasins my messages of any importance to anybody. It is not an organization. It is not a structure. It is simply a functional office”.
OSHO The Last Testament, Vol. 5, Chapter 12
¿Por qué una marca?
¿Puede una marca realmente "proteger" el trabajo de Osho?
* La respuesta es no. Una marca es un derecho de uso de una palabra, frase, símbolo o imagen en la comercialización. No tiene nada que ver con el contenido del producto o servicio que se comercializa. Una marca tiene que titular el propio producto o servicio antes de su comercialización de una marca puede ser aplicado al producto o servicio en el mercado. Una marca no da a nadie el derecho de propiedad en cualquier producto o servicio que el titular de la marca ya no cuenta.
¿Pueden las técnicas de meditación de Osho de ser protegidos por una marca?
* Una marca no tienen nada que ver con la forma en que el control de técnicas de meditación se utilizan bien. Vatayana envió un correo electrónico a los centros de hace unos meses que era muy engañoso. Dijo que las marcas eran necesarias para mantener el meditaciones "24 quilates". Esto no tiene ningún sentido en absoluto.
* Osho a sabiendas y voluntariamente puso sus técnicas de meditación en el dominio público hace décadas no sólo permitir, sino fomentar, a la gente a utilizar sus técnicas y para enseñarles a otros.
* Osho quería que las técnicas se pusiesen a disposición de tantas personas como sea posible, y las personas tomaron las técnicas de Osho y la difusión por todo el mundo. Osho porque decidieron hacerlo con sus propias técnicas, que en esencia se convirtió en propiedad pública desde hace mucho tiempo. OIF no es propietaria de las técnicas de meditación de Osho, y los EE.UU. Oficina de Patentes y Marcas lo saben.

¿Alguien puede proteger de técnicas de meditación de Osho?
* Nadie puede "proteger" las técnicas de meditación de Osho en esta último tiempo, porque nadie las posee. Osho, por su propia elección, dio a la basura. Usted podría decir que a la existencia en libertad. Él confía en que, obviamente, no necesitan las técnicas de protección en forma de control legal, porque él hizo todo lo posible para asegurarse de que nunca pasase.
* Las técnicas de meditación han sido de dominio público desde 30-40 años hasta ahora, y no hay manera que alguien pueda tener la propiedad legal de estas técnicas fuera de la opinión pública.
* Marcas de los nombres de las técnicas no permiten la OIF para controlar cómo alguien utiliza estas técnicas. Por lo tanto, si cualquier centro es de la idea de que podría sacrificar su independencia y autonomía en aras de la protección de la técnicas de meditación de Osho, ese esfuerzo sería completamente en vano.
¿Es el derecho de autor diferente de las marcas?
* El contenido de los libros y grabaciones, por ejemplo, están protegidos por derechos de autor, que son muy diferentes tipo de derecho de propiedad intelectual. Si alguien reclamaba a Osho como los escritos de su propia o el mal uso de las grabaciones, este sería un problema de derechos de autor. Ser propietario de una marca que no tienen nada que ver con la forma en que el contenido de la labor de Osho se utiliza.
¿El poseedor de una marca puede impedir que la gente hable de él o escriba sobre él?
* Por supuesto que no. Una marca que consiste en el nombre (o seudónimo, en este caso) de una persona histórica no tiene nada que ver con el control de la persona histórica o su patrimonio o reputación. Una marca de "Osho" no es sobre la persona de Osho. Una marca de "Osho" no da al titular de la marca derechos sobre la persona de Osho en absoluto.
* Todos los países donde las marcas de Osho han sido reclamadas tienen leyes que protegen la libertad de prensa y la libertad de expresión. Periodistas, escritores, editores, comentaristas y otros pueden decir lo que gustan de las personas, siempre y cuando no violen las leyes de difamación, responsabilidad, y la difamación.
* Marcas de leyes nunca se usan para limitar la libertad de prensa o la libertad de expresión. En la cultura moderna, si no nos gusta lo que alguien dice tenemos el derecho de réplica y el debate. No tenemos el poder para acallar las opiniones de los demás. Esto no es acerca de las marcas.

What is a Trademark?

There is a lot of confusion around this question within the sannyas community. This confusion has been created partly because of various claims being made about what a trademark is and what it does. The truth is that very few people, even many attorneys, really understand exactly what a trademark is, how it works, and how someone comes to own the right to use one, so it’s very easy for people to be confused and misled. Let us understand this issue by finding answers to some basic questions, which are as follows.

How is a Trademark defined and explained?

* A trademark is valid only if the owner has the exclusive right to use the mark for certain goods and services in the marketplace.

What a Trademark is not?

* If other people have equal rights to use the word, symbol, or image, then the word, symbol, or image cannot be a trademark. The reason for this is that if several people have a right to use it, the word, symbol, or image can’t tell the public that the goods or services meet the quality standards of a single source. A trademark is not primarily a property right of a company.

What a Trademark is?

* The very purpose of a trademark is first and foremost to protect the public’s right to know about quality. A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol, or image that is used in marketing a product or service. The mark has to identify the product or service as coming from a single source. Also, ownership of a trademark does not give ownership of the content of the product or service.

Can the word Osho be used as a Trademark?

* Osho can only be a trademark if one legal entity (person or company) has the legal right to control all goods and services related to Osho’s teachings so that whenever the public sees “Osho” connected to goods or services it will know that the goods or services come from a single source and that that single source guarantees a certain quality.

* However, that source can’t be Osho, since many other people besides Osho have long been involved in creating goods and services related to His work. Also, Osho never assigned His rights to anyone else, so if Osho is the source, no one owns the trademark.

What is being claimed under Osho as a Trademark?

* Books and audio and video recordings. Also, all the activities of Osho centers. These include meditation classes, sessions, and events; celebration events; music events; groups; sessions; bodywork; restaurants; books about Osho; newspapers; magazines; and any other business activities carried on under the name of Osho. We are also talking about all activities of individuals including classes, sessions, performances, seminars, groups, CDs, videos, books, and so on that are marketed using the name Osho.

Who is claiming Osho as a Trademark?

* The entity that is claiming to own the trademark for Osho (in most of the world) is Osho International Foundation (OIF), a small group legally based in Zurich, Switzerland, though OIF has only a mail-drop address there. No meditation activities are conducted by OIF in Zurich.

Is the claiming of Osho as a Trademark by OIF valid?

* In order for OIF, Zurich to own the trademark it has to claim that it is the source of all goods and services connected to Osho’s work and that it legally controls all the goods and services produced by Osho centers and individuals using “Osho.”

* OIF has to claim to legally control every aspect of work done using Osho’s name. To own the trademark for Osho, OIF would have to be able to guarantee to the public that all these goods and services meet a certain quality.

* If OIF cannot legally control all Osho centers and individuals using Osho, if OIF is not the source of the goods and services produced by the centers and individuals, and if OIF cannot guarantee the quality of all the goods and services of the Osho centers and individuals, then Osho cannot be a trademark for OIF.

* If the centers and individuals are independent and produce their own goods and services, then Osho is a term indicating a connection to the man Osho, but it can never be a trademark for any one company or person.

* By filing to register a trademark OIF doesn’t get ownership of the goods and services created by centers or individuals. The centers and individuals own what they have created and would have to assign their rights to OIF before OIF could legally control them. OIF is essentially demanding that the centers do that, or, to be exact, is claiming the centers have already done that.

Why and for what purpose essentially is Osho being claimed as a Trademark?

* The issue of Osho as a trademark is essentially about control of or independence of the Osho centers and individuals.

Was Osho ever in favour of exercising such control?

* The idea of having Osho’s work tightly controlled as a form of commercialism is, no doubt, some people’s idea of safety, but it certainly isn’t Osho’s.

* In light of Osho’s teachings, such centralized control would mean that a “mother church” exists that strictly controls all of the work around Osho’s teachings, that a mother church dictates dogma and doctrine, that a mother church interprets Osho’s teachings in terms of purity. Licensed centers would not be allowed to produce any product or service without receiving permission from OIF and having the service or product approved for “purity.”

How would it help or hurt if centers follow OIF?

* As long as some centres and individual are willing to stand up to OIF and insist on being independent, as Osho has asked them to be, OIF is not likely to prevail in claiming to own exclusive rights to use Osho as a trademark. Even if OIF owned a trademark, centres that choose to can remain independent.

* The danger is that those centres that cooperate with OIF and support OIF’s claim to own a trademark, or that don’t object when they’re informed of what OIF is claiming, will end up legally and financially controlled by OIF. The centres that stand up to OIF can remain independent.

* The choice of whether to agree to be legally and financially controlled by OIF is up to each centre.

What are Osho’s guidelines? How did He see His words and meditations reach people?
* Here are Osho’s own words giving a clear message:

“I cannot see you dependent. I cannot see you being harassed, tortured, ordered, made to obey—no. Hence, I say to you: My way of life is not a religion. It is certainly a kind of religiousness. To be religious without being attached to a religion is the most beautiful experience of life. Then religiousness is a quality, not a faith”.
From Bondage to Freedom, Chapter 15, Question 2

“The world headquarters will be publishing my books, will be releasing my tapes, videotapes, will be doing every kind of work. But it has no domination over anybody. All communes of the world are independent. All centers of the world are absolutely free. They are under nobody’s guidance. My sannyasins are directly related to me. The world headquarters will simply function so that you can have a connection with me. Otherwise you don’t have any place to whom to ask where I am, what is happening to me. The world headquarters is not in any way a power over any sannyasin, over any other sannyas centers, ashramas, communes. It has nothing to do with that. It is my secretariat. And its function is to convey to me messages of importance and to convey to the sannyasins my messages of any importance to anybody. It is not an organization. It is not a structure. It is simply a functional office”.
The Last Testament, Vol. 5, Chapter 12

Why a Trademark?

Would a Trademark really “protect” Osho’s work?

* The answer is no. A trademark is a right to use a word, phrase, symbol, or image in marketing. It has nothing to do with the content of the product or service being marketed. A trademark holder has to own the product or service being marketed before a trademark can be applied to the product or service in the marketplace. A trademark doesn’t give anyone ownership rights in any product or service the trademark holder doesn’t already own.

Can Osho’s meditation techniques be protected by a Trademark?

* A trademark would have nothing to do with controlling how the meditation techniques are used either. Vatayana sent out an email to centers a few months ago that was very misleading. She said that trademarks were needed to keep the meditations “24 karat.” This makes no sense at all.

* Osho knowingly and willingly put His meditation techniques in the public domain decades ago by not only allowing, but encouraging, people to use His techniques and to teach them to others.

* Osho wanted the techniques made available to as many people as possible, and Osho’s people took those techniques and spread them around the world. Because Osho chose to do that with His own techniques, they became essentially public property long ago. OIF doesn’t own Osho’s meditation techniques, and the US Patent and Trademark Office know this.

Can anyone protect Osho’s meditation techniques?

* No one can “protect” Osho’s meditation techniques at this late date, because no one owns them. Osho, by His own choice, gave them away. You might say He released them to Existence. He obviously trusted that the techniques need no protection in the form of legal control, because He did everything to make sure that it never happened.

* The meditation techniques have been in the public domain since 30–40 years by now, and there’s no way for anyone to take legal ownership of those techniques away from the public.

* Trademarks for the names of the techniques would not allow OIF to control how anyone uses those techniques. So if any centre has the idea that it could sacrifice its independence and autonomy for the sake of protecting Osho’s meditation techniques, that effort would be entirely in vain.

Is copyright different from Trademark?

* The content of books and recordings, for example, are protected by copyrights, which are a very different kind of intellectual property right. If someone was claiming Osho’s writings as his own or misusing recordings, this would be a copyright issue. Owning a trademark would have nothing to do with how the content of Osho’s work is used.

Can a Trademark holder prevent people from talking about Him or writing about Him?

* Absolutely not. A trademark that consists of the name (or in this case pseudonym) of a historical person has nothing whatsoever to do with control of the historical person or his/her estate or reputation. A trademark for “Osho” is not about the person Osho. A trademark for “Osho” wouldn’t give the trademark holder any rights over Osho the person at all.

* All countries where Osho trademarks have been claimed have laws protecting the freedom of the press and freedom of speech. Journalists, writers, publishers, and other commentators can say what they like about people as long as they don’t violate the laws of slander, liable, and defamation.

* Trademark laws are never used to limit freedom of the press or freedom of speech. In modern culture, if we don’t like what someone says we have the right to reply and debate. We don’t have the power to stifle the opinions of others. This isn’t what trademarks are about.

(Traducción libre de Ma Gyan Darshana)

¿Hizo Osho alguna vez transferencia a terceros sus derechos de autor? Did Osho ever transfer His copyrights to others?

¿Hizo Osho alguna vez transferencia a terceros sus derechos de autor?
No, no lo hizo. Dos documentos que han salido a la luz que pueden (o no) han sido firmados por Osho. Estas son las licencias para la publicación de algunos de sus libros.
(Vea "¿Cuáles son los documentos de la OIF se basa en reclamar la propiedad de derechos de autor?" Por los documentos y un completo examen de sus efectos jurídicos.]
Derechos de autor son derechos que deben ser transferidos claramente y por escrito. No pueden ser transferidos a través de inferencia o declaraciones orales. Tiene que ser un documento válido por escrito claramente que todas las transferencias de interés en los derechos de autor. Si ese documento nunca existió, que no es probable, no tenemos ese documento ahora. La cuestión de los derechos de autor de la propiedad de parte de los EE.UU. de marcas, pero ninguno de los documentos producidos en el descubrimiento o en caso de que las pruebas en más de nueve años de litigio son las cesiones de derechos de autor.
En otras palabras, la OIF parece no tener esos documentos para producir. (Desde la Junta de Marcas no tiene competencia directa sobre los derechos de autor, no podía decidir si la OIF, Zurich propiedad de derechos de autor, sólo la forma en que la reivindicación de los propios afectados la marca reclamación.) Un reclamante de los derechos de autor de los derechos de autor Osho tiene que tener lo que se denomina una cadena completa de la titularidad de Osho vincular a ella. Para Osho la propia realidad los derechos de autor OIF tendría que probar que la propiedad de derechos de autor Osho asignado a la RF, RF asignado a RFI, RFI y lo asignó a la OIF, Zurich. Si cualquiera de los enlaces de esta cadena es que faltan, la OIF no recibe nada. El eslabón más débil en esta cadena es el primer documento de 1978 (Documento 1), que no sólo no puede ser autenticado, pero es en su cara una licencia, no una cesión de derechos de autor. Documento 2 es esencialmente el mismo que el Documento 1 y podría, como máximo, de transferencia de derechos de publicación de obras o no identificados en las ocho obras de Documento 1. (Ver ¿Cuáles son los documentos de la OIF se basa en reclamar la propiedad de derechos de autor?) Esto significa que no posee la OIF Osho por cesión de derechos de autor, como lo ha reclamado. Trabajo-para-alquiler. Hay otra teoría de que la OIF, Zurich ha intentado utilizar para justificar la propiedad de derechos de autor. OIF presentó derechos de autor de libros y grabaciones de discursos de Osho dado por los EE.UU. con la Biblioteca del Congreso de varios títulos de Osho del trabajo alegando que la OIF propiedad a través de derechos de autor de una obra por contrato de arrendamiento de Osho. (Es importante recordar que el registro no es una prueba de la propiedad y no significa nada si no la OIF en realidad el propio autor.) En general un derecho de autor otorga a un trabajo creativo en cuanto el trabajo se convierte en "fijos", por ejemplo, poner por escrito, grabado, la música puesta en anotaciones, fotografía, obra de arte o de hecho. La persona que crea el trabajo se presume el propietario del trabajo que crea. Si alguien crea algo en nombre de otra persona y se paga por el trabajo, el derecho de autor podría pertenecer a la persona que financió los proyectos. En los EE.UU. esto es cierto si, y sólo si, el creador del proyecto, firma un trabajo por contrato de arrendamiento antes de que se termine el proyecto que se especifica que los derechos en el trabajo pertenecerá al financiador. Osho nunca fue al servicio de ninguna fundación, nunca se le pagó para dar discursos, y nunca firmó un trabajo por contrato de arrendamiento con nadie. Los dos acuerdos de licencia de Osho supuestamente había firmado especifica que Osho tiene que elegir si desea o no que cualquier discurso incluido en la publicación de acuerdo de licencia (documentos 1 y 2) En otras palabras, se mantenía el control sobre su trabajo y sólo de acuerdo en que Él podría conceder derechos limitados (la publicación de una licencia) después de que la obra fue creada (discurso registrado) y un derecho de autor ha sido (adjunto) que pertenecía a él. Ni la teoría puede tener éxito.
La única razón por la RFI / OIF, Zurich se han registrado los derechos de autor en los EE.UU. para reclamar un trabajo para contratar a base de la propiedad es porque se dieron cuenta de que los documentos supuestamente firmados por Osho no eran las cesiones de derechos de autor, pero los acuerdos de licencia. Ellos pueden tener la esperanza de que tendrían más suerte que pasa fuera de los acuerdos de trabajo para que los acuerdos de alquiler como las cesiones de derechos de autor. En los EE.UU. las marcas OIF caso optó por hacer la cesión de la titularidad en lugar argumento. En verdad, ninguna de estas teorías pueden tener éxito en última instancia. Los acuerdos de licencia supuestamente firmado por Osho claramente no transfiere ningún tipo de derechos de propiedad en los derechos de autor de Osho. La transferencia de los derechos de propiedad que han sido tan necesarias para el derecho a contratar a un acuerdo, ya que sería para un acuerdo de cesión de los derechos de autor, y no hay ningún documento en el que se transfiere la propiedad de derechos de Osho. Osho de Entendimiento.
Aunque no existe ningún original del documento supuestamente firmado por Osho en 1978 (Documento 1), es posible que Osho muy limitada firmado el presente acuerdo de RF con la India. El idioma de ese acuerdo hace que sea absolutamente claro que la intención de Osho se reserva el derecho a controlar su propio trabajo en ese momento. Puso todo tipo de condiciones en la licencia concedida y que se reservaba el derecho de retener la labor futura de la licencia y la revocación de la licencia y darle a alguien más. El hecho de que no original, se sabe y se puede indicar que existen. Osho decidió poner fin a esa licencia, y pidieron que los originales se destruyeran. Ese no es el tipo de documento que se ha perdido otra cosa. Una cosa más es clara, y es que no existe documento que Osho haya transferido la propiedad de los derechos de autor a nadie. Esto significa que Osho mantuvo Sus derechos de propiedad durante toda su vida y la OIF no tiene ninguna reclamación válida a los derechos de autor propiedad hoy.
Did Osho ever transfer His copyrights to others?

No, He didn’t. Two documents have come to light that may (or may not) have been signed by Osho. These are publishing licenses for some of His books. (See 'What are the documents OIF is relying on to claim copyright ownership?' for the documents and a complete discussion of their legal effects.]
Copyrights are legal rights that must be transferred clearly in writing. They can’t be transferred through inference or oral statements. There has to be a valid written document that clearly transfers all legal interest in the copyrights. If such a document ever existed, which isn’t likely, we don’t have that document now.
The question of copyright ownership was part of the US trademark case, but none of the documents produced in discovery or in evidence in that case over nine years of litigation are assignments of copyright ownership. In other words, OIF appears to have no such documents to produce. (Since the Trademark Board did not have direct jurisdiction over copyrights, it could not decide whether OIF, Zurich owned copyrights, only how the claim to own them impacted the trademark claim.)
A copyright claimant for Osho’s copyrights has to have what is called a complete chain of title linking Osho to it. To really own Osho’s copyrights OIF would have to prove that Osho assigned copyright ownership to RF, RF assigned it to RFI, and RFI assigned it to OIF, Zurich. If any link in this chain is missing, OIF gets nothing. The weakest link in this chain is the first document of 1978 (Document 1), which not only can’t be authenticated, but is on its face a license, not a copyright assignment. Document 2 is essentially the same as Document 1 and could, at most, transfer publishing rights in unidentified works or the eight works for Document 1. (See What are the documents OIF is relying on to claim copyright ownership?)
This means that OIF does not own Osho’s copyrights by assignment, as it has claimed.
There is one other theory that OIF, Zurich has tried to use to justify copyright ownership. OIF filed copyrights for books and recordings of discourses given by Osho with the US Library of Congress for several titles of Osho’s work claiming that OIF owned copyrights through a work-for-hire agreement with Osho. (It’s important to remember that a registration is not proof of ownership and means nothing if OIF didn’t actually own the copyrights.)
Generally a copyright attaches to a creative work as soon as the work becomes “fixed,” for example, put in writing, recorded, music put into notations, photograph taken, or artwork made. The person creating the work is presumed to own the work he or she creates. If someone creates something on behalf of someone else and is paid for the work, the copyright might belong to the person financing the project. In the US this is true if, and only if, the creator of the project signs a work-for-hire agreement before the project is completed specifying that the rights in the work will belong to the financer.
Osho was never employed by any foundation, never was paid for giving discourses, and never signed a work-for-hire agreement with anyone. The two license agreements Osho was alleged to have signed both specified that Osho got to choose whether or not He included any discourse in the publishing license agreement (Documents 1 & 2) In other words, He kept control over His work and only agreed that He might grant limited rights (a publishing license) after the work was created (discourse recorded) and a copyright had been (attached) that belonged to Him.
Neither Theory Can Succeed
The only reason the RFI/OIF, Zurich would have registered copyrights in the US claiming a work for hire basis for ownership is because they realized that the documents allegedly signed by Osho were not assignments of copyright ownership, but license agreements. They may have hoped that they would have more luck passing off the agreements as work-for-hire agreements than as assignments of copyrights. In the US trademark case OIF opted to make the assignment of ownership argument instead.
In truth, neither of these theories can ultimately succeed. The license agreements allegedly signed by Osho clearly do not transfer any ownership rights in Osho’s copyrights. A transfer of ownership rights would have been just as necessary for a right-to-hire agreement as it would be for an assignment of copyright agreement, and there is no document that transfers ownership rights from Osho.
Osho’s Understanding
Though there is no existing original of the document allegedly signed by Osho in 1978 (Document 1), it is possible that Osho signed this very limited agreement with RF India. The language of that agreement makes it absolutely clear that Osho intended to reserve the rights to control His own work at that point in time. He set all kinds of conditions on the license He granted and reserved the right to withhold future work from the license and to revoke the license and give it to someone else. The fact that no original is known to exist may indicate that Osho decided to end that license and asked that the original be destroyed. That isn’t the kind of document that would have been lost otherwise.
One more thing is clear, and that is that no document exists that transferred Osho’s copyright ownership to anyone else. This means that Osho owned His rights during His entire life and OIF has no valid claim to copyright ownership today.
(Traducción libre de Ma Gyan Darshana)


Soon after Osho left His body in 1990 there have been attempts have been made to monopolise the legacy of OSHO. The Master’s Enlightened Art, His unique signatures and even the Meditation Techniques were applied for Trade Marks in USA and other countries. An Enlightened Mystic of the 21st century, Osho’s message is for the benefit of humanity and therefore should essentially be in the free domain, and available to the world without being fettered by trademarks.
The extent of the trademark and copyright regime can be comprehended from the various legal cases and threats imposed on meditation centers and Osho lovers for using the term Osho. One example of such a monopolization of Osho is the Osho Dhyan Mandir
Case. In the year 2000, Osho International Foundation (OIF), a Zurich based organization filed a litigation in the National Arbitration Forum (NAF - American Court of Arbitration whose jurisdiction is internet related conflict) against Osho Dhyan Mandir (ODM) based in Delhi, for using the term Osho in their website. Claiming to be rightful owner of Osho and His works and calling upon the registered trademarks OIF pleaded for the transfer of the domain name http://www.oshoworld.com/
from Osho Dhyan Mandir to OIF, Zurich. Dhyan Mandir in its strong response pointed out the fact that Osho is not a valid trademark for materials by or regarding Osho and with support of evidence proved that OIF, Zurich had committed fraud on the Patent and Trademark Office by misrepresenting facts. Dhyan Mandir maintained that as followers of Osho, ODM has an internationally recognized right to use the term Osho. The Dhyan Mandir also pointed out that OIF’s defective registrations of trademarks needs to be judged whether the marks at issue actually serve as trademarks. NAF decide in favour Osho Dhyan Mandir to retain the domain name oshoworld.com. The Arbitrator observed that “To grant OIF’s request for relief would be to permit virtual monopolization on the Internet by Complainant of any domain name which includes the name of a great spiritual teacher and leader. While making no judgment on the relative merits or validity of the world’s religions or spiritual movements or any leader thereof, this Arbitrator finds that permitting this would be as improper as doing the same with Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, Shintoism or any of the several hundred of the world’s other religions and/or spiritual movements.”
In the process of the legal battle that ensued between OIF, Zurich and Osho Dhyan Mandir over the domain name, the fact that Osho and His works are being registered as trademarks in the United States and in other parts of the world concerned all Osho disciples, lovers and friends. To voice the concern of all Osho lovers and friends, an international platform was needed. Osho Friends International (OFI) was formed with the objective to resist such efforts to grossly commercialize, control and monopolize the vision of Osho. The effort is to assert that nobody owns the trademark of the name Osho. Mystics like Buddha, Jesus, Heraclitus, Lao Tzu, Dogen, Nansen, Basho, Jelaluddin Rumi, Kahlil Gibran, and Kabir are not brands or trademarks neither are their writings are copyrighted. Osho being a link in the long chain of enlightened individuals who have tried to raise the consciousness of humanity, cannot be trademarked nor his discourses, meditations and music copyrighted by anyone. Supported by several meditation centers and friends of Osho from all over the globe, Osho Friends International is an effort to share the legacy of Osho with as many people as possible, without payment of royalties or copyright charges and that a few people do not hijack this invaluable heritage. Message of Osho is for the mankind. In many of His discourses he has specifically mentioned that there should be no copyright on His words and that the purity of his message is to be maintained.
With these objectives, Osho Friends proceeded to legally oppose the registration of Osho trademarks and servicemarks and also to have the existing registrations cancelled.
In November, 2000, Osho Friends filed its first notice of opposition challenging the application of OIF to register the servicemark of Osho Active Meditations. The mark applied for is the name of a famous spiritual mystic, namely, Osho, and is not registrable. Osho Friends pointed out OIF’s lack of evidence to prove ownership rights and also that OIF has committed fraud on the trademark office by not disclosing the fact that Osho is the name of a well known spiritual mystic.
In December, 2000, Osho Friends filed another petition to cancel the trademarks registered under Registration No. 1,815,840 for Osho (education books and printed teaching materials in the field of religion and philosophy), Registration No. 2,174,607 for Osho (providing religion, philosophy and science information via a global computer network), Registration No. 2,180,173 for Osho (pre-recorded audio and video tapes in the fields of education, religion, philosophy and science) and Registration number 2,322,901 for Osho Rebalancing (books and printed materials for education purposes in the field of religion and philosophy). Introducing Osho Friends’s stand on the cause to facilitate the unrestricted spread and study of Osho’s teachings Osho Friends pointed out in the petition that Osho Friends members include individuals and meditation centers in the United States that study and spread the teachings of Osho.
Osho Discourses Edited
Osho Friends International is committed to the cause of bringing Osho in free domain so that the message of the Master is available freely and extensively. Osho wanted His message to spread throughout the world and encouraged His Sannyasin publishers to publish His books. No royalty was ever demanded or permission sought for publishing these books. Osho was particularly clear about maintaining the purity of His words. Explicitly the Master had conveyed that no change was to be made in His words and during one of His discourses had said, "Don't try to improve upon it. Leave it as it is. Raw, wild, illogical, paradoxical, contradictory, repetitive, whatsoever it is, leave it as it is!" Of late, it has come to light that Message of Osho is being edited! Books (for example, The Book of Wisdom) are being edited and changes made to the original discourses.
Meditation Techniques devised by Osho for instance
Kundalini Meditation, Nadabrahma Meditation and Active Meditations were trademarked in the U.S. while for some other techniques; trademark has been applied for, with the United States Patent And Trademark Office (USPTO). Osho has said, "You don't understand what meditation is. It is nobody's belonging, possession. You cannot have any copyright. Perhaps if your country gives you trademarks and copyrights on things like meditation, then it will be good to have a copyright on stupidity. That will help the whole world to be relieved... Only you will be stupid and nobody else can be stupid; it will be illegal." It is quite clear then, that He was neither interested in nor intended that His discourses and meditations be copyrighted or trademarked.
Osho Signatures also known as Enlightened Art were also being targeted for trademarks.
Osho Friends‘s efforts resulted in TTAB sustaining its opposition and petitions for cancellation. In an unanimous verdict by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on 13 January 2009, it has established that Osho and His works cannot be trademarked. In response to the opposition lodged by Osho Friends International (OFI) India, the Board ruled that Osho’s name is used to describe the teachings and meditation techniques of the mystic Osho and the spiritual and meditative movement that grew up around him. Since “Osho” does not identify only one Osho group as the source, it cannot serve as a trade mark owned by Osho International Foundation, Zurich. As a result defendant OIF can not foreclose others from utilising the term OSHO.


The freely downloadable audio-video discourses have been pulled down due to threat by OIF, Zurich to our US server host.
For full details visit