DMCA Complaint from The WatchTower for links to KS-10 'Shepherding' book (page 15)

blondie

Kent Steinhaug and Jan Haugland were the first ex-jws to post the original elders manual on the internet. They had quite a battle.

AK - Jeff

Someone should print the cover page, make 100 copies at the local Kinkos and place one on each windshield at the KH. THAT would be fun to watch.

Jeff

I like the way you think AK_Jeff. How about copying the title page (page 6) where there is a notice about secrecy and where it says "This book belongs to.." write something like "Now available for download everywhere"

just n from bethel

Eggnog:

1st, Is this all one sentence?:

Like I said, I don't care to elaborate on the obvious here, but do you think it embarrassing for an elder to have to handle a case of a married brother's extramarital affair with a sister for six months with whom he had studied three years ago which affair comes to light a year after the sister's baptism when their affair ended two years earlier is outted by a householder invited to the Kingdom Hall, who sees the brother and his children, and the sister at the Kingdom Hall the same as a case where a sister that has a one-night stand three years ago with someone that becomes a brother six months ago and feels it necessary to unburden himself by reporting the sister's fling with him?

2nd, I got bored reading your term paper so I pretty much stopped there - in case anybody else didn't want to miss the Giants/Philly game to read Eggnog, here's the gist of what I figure he's saying:

Elders can't understand how to tell if somebody is really sorry becuase God doesn't give them holy spirit for that anymore. Instead he gave them this book. Unfortunately He's not strong enough to prevent this book from being seen by non-elders. This book has all the rules of how to tell if sinners are repentant. Only elders get to know the rules. If non elders knew the rules, it just wouldn't be right - women and others would trick them. So I'm going to go on the interweb and play world wide hall monitor on behalf of JWs, because like the GB, I love self appointed positions. Oh and I also want everyone to know that in 1914, in 1925, within months of 1941, before young adults in the 60s grow old, in 1975, in the 20th century, before the 1914 generation dies very, very, very, very, soon God will kill everybody who read this book that was not a JW elder. Because that's one of the rules. In the meantime, everlasting death will just not suffice as good enough punishment for such apostate scumbags. You can 100% expect the WT to pull out the big guns and sue the pants off everybody that utters one single sentence from the elders book, especially if it's in context. Even if you're a witness. There's a rule against that too, but they get a pass. Also, don't go to apsotate JW internet sites. That's also a rule, but I get a pass because I'm special. The end.

What does everybody think - did that sum up eggnog's response?

cantleave

eggnog I love you - I hope you are the one who clears my decomposing body in the new system. You can even feed me to your pet lion.

dust

The book is copyrighted. The distribution rights are the property of the WTS. It is probably a crime to copy it or distribute it without prior consent from the publisher. Such rights are important and should be respected. If one of us writes a poem, s/he is the rightful owner of that poem, whether or not it has been registered at the Library of Congress.

But there is also something called civil disobedience. Those who violate the righs of the owner of this publication do it for reasons that they consider more important than the legal and moral rights of this particular publisher: The book contains rules that are valid for the more than 7 million members of a specific organization, but the same members are denied access to a systematic collection of those rules. The organization claims that everyone is equal and that it has no clergy class, and still it has a secret book reserved for the pastoral class among the members.

Revealing the double standards of a self-proclaimed spokesman of God, and disclosing secret rules to those who are affected by those rules (even though most of the rules have already been disclosed by the publisher itself!), may very well be reasons for some of us to partake in civil disobedience. It can be compared to journalists who record people without prior consent and then publish the recordings. The approach should be avoided, but sometimes it is inevitable.

WTWizard

Copyright? They just want to be able to do whatever they feel like, regardless of how disgusting it might be--even having arrangements in field circus involving systemic rape of children out in field circus to save time--whenever they damn well feel like it. And have no one being able to do a damn thing about it, or even know that this sxxx is going on when and if it ever does start, because of some stupid copyright law.

Normally, I am in favor of upholding copyright laws because they do protect people that make their livelihood on their works. I remember a while ago when someone wanted to post Crisis of Conscience on pdf and link it here, and that thread was rightly removed and the poster got in big trouble for breaking the law. (That deprived Raymond Franz of his livelihood.) And that goes for things like music you can readily buy legally. But, when they are sitting on a work and not making even a penny on it, or worse, misusing it to commit worse crimes against the public or the members and use the copyright laws to obstruct justice, those copyright laws then need to be broken. And, if they know a hounders' instruction book is going to end up online, they will be careful before coming up with a Kingdumb Misery instructing something that would result in the children being systemically raped to save some 5 minutes out in field circus. If they know they will not see such a Kingdumb Misery posted online, they might just get more brazen and pull sxxx like that. And get away with it.

Gayle

If a business, have "fine print" to their rules and regulations but don't disclose 'fully' prior to contract or changes it along the way, and has ways to enforce it after the fact, then this is extremely morally irresponsible and should be exposed and held accountable. The "full" disclosure laws supercedes any of their SECRET "copyrights."

It's totally immoral when a "religion/business" have no accountability in the same actions and can get away with it. The religion hides behind its hidden "copyright" laws.

How can we "not" share/expose the 'full' secret "rules and regulations." We do and will expose verbally, but we know showing the "written" page has an unquestionable impact.

DMCA Complaint from The WatchTower for links to KS-10 'Shepherding' book

blondie

stillajwexelder

greenhornet