NLP 'Ownership'

[Unregistered]

Has anybody heard about recent moves by Bandler and John LeValle to take action against anyone who hasn't trained in NLP and is offering NLP services and training? I do a lot of work in NLP and have had a couple of calls by people suggesting that they are making plans to take back the rights to NLP - could they do this?

[Neurotic1]

Hi

I wouldn't have thought so. I would have thought that such a move by Bandler might be unlikely. That might be a little like Mesmer coming back and saying 'you cannot hypnotise anyone or train anyone to hypnotise anyone else unless you have done my course'.

Nobody can stop you from using NLP or training others to use it unless it becomes more strictly legislated in law. If laws were passed to regulate NLP, people might be required to present evidence of their skills in NLP which might take the form of a portfolio or certification for example. Usually there is a system for 'grandfathering' those without certification whereby they are allowed to continue to practise but people new to the field are required to fulfil the training requirements.

Even if someone stopped you from being able to use the name NLP to describe what you do, it would be difficult to stop you from doing it.

Having said that, I am not an expert but I do suspect that, if NLP becomes more regulated, people will want to attend courses with a certified trainer who offers a recognised certification.

Would be interesting to hear other's views.

[Merlin]

NLP is a label.
*IF* NLP became trademarked, then you could not LABEL what you do as NLP. You can still do everything, just not call it NLP.
Call it XYZ, COS (changework on steroids) or some other LABEL

But Richard has tried and failed in the past to reclaim the LABEL NLP, so not to worry.