OAHI and Alreck Meipoom, RHI plagerized my article/book word for word.

[Nick Gromicko]

OAHI and Alreck Meipoom, RHI, an OAHI Board member recently put out this: http://www.oahi.com/reading/OntarioI...r-June2006.pdf

Page 8 of the publication was stolen word for word from my book and previously published articles such as http://www.nachi.org/prelisting.htm which have been online for many years. Some of it has been published for a decade or more.

This is my work, down to the last comma.

How dare he put his name on my article!

[Nick Gromicko]

I trust OAHI will release an apology immediately and print a correction explaining that Nick Gromicko was the real author.

[Dale L. Staben]

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
I guess he figures we don't read the Canadian stuff, I smell a copyright infringement or at least a letter of dissatisfaction with his plagiarism

[Nick Gromicko]

I'm not going to do anything as I trust OAHI will immediately release an apology and a correction.

[wjung]

Nick,
I hope you are not holding your breath. I would hate to read your obituary.
Wolf

[Nick Gromicko]

Why wouldn't they. This meipoom fella put his name on my work and OAHI published it. Look, I don't want to start up a war but what is right is right and I deserve to have this corrected by OAHI. No?

[wjung]

Nick,
I agree with you, however I don't think it's going to happen. If it does I will be amazed.
Wolf

[Nick Gromicko]

I emailed Bill Mullen and asked him to do something to get a press release out. It is the least they can do to mitigate damages.

[rwand1]

Nick

OAHI does not operate that way. They think they have absolute power. They pick and choose which complaints they handle. The complaints they can't deal with get buried. Thats a fact.

As to sending Bill Mullen a letter you are sending it to the wrong person given Mr. Mullens posturing and long held view and documented statements about you and NACHI.

As this is an OAHI matter I suggest you send your concerns directly to the OAHI lawyer and the Board of Directors and to the Discipline Committee Chair Mr. Lloyd to look into this matter. The problem is not CAHPI as this is a published article by OAHI. I guess the Ethics Chair of CAHPI Mr. Lawrenson should also be informed of this matter. After all its one big happy family up here now that OAHI is OAHI/CAHPI.

[Claude Lawrenson]

Certainly reading this column makes me aware of the issue. Thanks for the referral - but at face value is this not a matter for CAHPI National but one between OAHI and Nick - re: authority having jurisdiction.

However Nick is certainly welcome to file a "formal written complaint" with the required complaint and documentation of evidence for the claim with CAHPI National if he feels the need.

Regards, Claude

[rwand1]

Why would Nick do that when CAHPI has no real power to deal with issues because it is not mandated to do so, and the existing by-laws (CAHPI) don't give the Ethics department any power or teeth. I think CAHPI can only pass the matter off to OAHI. Given the record of OAHI who can't respond to complaints in a timely matter or if at all.

[rwand1]

I emailed Bill Mullen and asked him to do something to get a press release out. It is the least they can do to mitigate damages.

Isn't he the same person who has been on record in the London Free Press as stating facts that are somewhat erroneous, knowing them to be false and then not having the falsities corrected. The same guy who swore up and down that he didn't say what he said even though his name was attached to the article. Certainly not the first time he has been fudging the facts as we all know them?

[Larry Ewens]

Did I just see a dollar bill being passed here? Typical CAHPI. They want to have the authority to discipline anybody who gets into the National Certification but won't take care of a plagiarism complaint. CAHPI, according to them are the governing body, but I guess when it suits their agenda.
Larry

[rwand1]

Larry,

It wasn't a real buck, it was Canadian Tire Money! We know that anyone in Ontario who becomes Nationally Certified will be subject to the OAHI disciplinary system. Given what we all know that is a big concern for anyone in NACHI seeking National Certification. There is no assurance whatsoever you will be given fair treatment let alone a hearing.

[rwand1]

http://www.asttbc.org/org/act_regs.html

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/fca/2002/2002fca218.html

Ontario Association of Architects (Appellant)
v.
Association of Architectural Technologists of Ontario (Respondent)
Indexed as: Ontario Assn. of Architects v. Assn. of Architectural Technologists of Ontario (C.A.)
Court of Appeal, Stone, Evans and Sharlow JJ.A.-- Toronto, April 23; Ottawa, May 28, 2002.
Trade-marks -- Official Marks -- Appeal from Trial Division's dismissal of application to reverse Registrar of Trade-marks' decision to give public notice of adoption, use of official mark by Association of Architectural Technologists of Ontario (AATO) -- Only public authority may register official mark under Trade-marks Act, s. 9(1)(n)(iii) -- AATO not-for-profit corporation, incorporated by letters patent, continued by private Act of Ontario Legislature -- Applications Judge holding AATO public authority as controlled by Legislature which could amend enabling legislation -- Appeal allowed -- Application of two-part test of degree of governmental control, public benefit to determine whether public authority -- Duty to do some thing of benefit to public (third part of English test) may be relevant as element of public benefit -- Government control of otherwise private organization requiring some ongoing supervision of activities -- Legislature's exclusive power to change AATO's statutory objects, powers, duties insufficient to satisfy government control test because not allowing government to exercise ongoing influence -- AATO's activities benefit public -- Setting, enforcing standards of professional competence regulating part of practice of profession, providing public with some assurance as to competence, honesty of members -- That activities may also benefit members not fatal to characterization of public benefit.
Trade-marks -- Practice -- Registrar of Trade-marks giving public notice of adoption, use by Association of Architectural Technologists of Ontario (AATO) of official marks -- Ontario Association of Architects applied to Trial Division for order reversing Registrar's decision pursuant to Federal Court Rules, 1998, governing both applications for judicial review, appeals under Trade-marks Act, s. 56, without specifying which remedial route pursuing -- Should be treated as application for judicial review, not as appeal -- Nothing in scheme of Trade-marks Act, s. 9(1) justifying departure from normal principle person who was neither party, nor intervener in proceedings having no standing to exercise statutory right of appeal.