Watch Tower sues Quotes for $100,000 plus plus plus...

by Quotes 354 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  BluesBrother

  I have read all the posts in this thread .. I cannot express how strongly I feel my support for "Quotes" in this matter . His site is a wonderful source of reference material that is simply what the WT have said .Can that be wrong?

  It is particularly ironic in view of their own practice of quoting , or selectively misquoting out of context , scientific statements to serve their purpose. Can they demonstrate that the quotes by Quotes are misrepresenting what they really said? Could be an interesting debate.

  I have no specialist knowlege but I would only say that 1) My c/d roms have been given me freely at the K/H . No one asked for payment, does that make a difference?

  The material is definately in the public domain and has been given away freely at a recipients doorstep, after the JW called specifically to do that. How can they object to having it given further distribution by Quotes?

  2) c/d roms include the NWT of the Bible. Is quoting the Bible subject to copyright too?

  I shall look out for any co ordinated campaign to assist
• 

  RichieRich

  I'm doing my part... but I need you!!

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/98196/1.ashx
• 

  core

  Usual suits at law for copyright breach etc are based on monetary loss of the Plaintiff - as the WT "gives" its literature (all the "quotes") FREE OF CHARGE how can they claim any loss/damage - the statement of claim is somewhat odd in my eyes although prepared by top specialist lawyers - it covers apparent defamation of the WT brand, attempts to deceive the reader by metatags (neither involving copyright breach) as well as dealing with the element of quoting outside of what the plaintiff considers is fair use - seems that any reasonable trial judge would look at the mish mash of issues and dismiss most out of hand as irrelevant to the central claim
• 

  Gerard

  AWAKE!, August 22, 1984 page 28 From Our Readers

  [commenting on an article titled "The Pope on the Move" in the issue of December 8, 1983]

  " You all loved it, didn’t you? You couldn’t resist taking a shot at the Catholic Church, could you? I will never forgive the way you mercilessly tore down the Pope. If Jehovah’s Witnesses must refer to cheap shots in attempting to bring down other religions, they’re in more trouble than the Catholics. We surely were not trying to take cheap shots at the pope or the Catholic Church, nor were we criticizing Catholics. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OCCUPIES A VERY SIGNIFICANT POSITION IN THE WORLD AND CLAIMS TO BE THE WAY OF SALVATION FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. ANY ORGANIZATION THAT ASSUMES THAT POSITION SHOULD BE WILLING TO SUBMIT TO SCRUTINY AND CRITICISM. All who criticize have the obligation to be truthful in presenting the facts and fair and objective in assessing such. In both respects we try to live up to that obligation. — ED"

  Nathan, isn't it hilarious this was published in 1984? (eg: George Wells Novel: 1984)
• 

  Gerard

  The WT's vast legal experience cannot be ignored. They know they have no case and will drag this suit in an attemt to bankrupt Mr. Quotes before the case goes to trial.

  During this prolonged time, a multiple campain will shame the WT even further.
• 

  richard

  Was Raymond Franz ever sued by the WTS for quoting from the Society's literature? And when I say 'quoting', I mean the massive amount of text he took from WTS' publications and confidential memo's which were reproduced in CoC and ICoCF.
• 

  loosie

  Now why doesn't the WTBTS use their own advice and "wait on Jehovah". If the website is doing something wrong by quoting the WT (which we all know it's not) Jehovah will take care of it, and WT can concentrate on other more important matters, such as keeping an eye on those child molestors they seem fond of.
• 

  G Money

  I´d say find jurisdictions where the WT would never win and set up mirror sites there, but not you, Quotes but people with no money, put a homeless guy as owner of record. To file all those suits in all those jurisdictions won´t work. Use free hosting sites, etc.
• 

  free2beme

  If the Watchtower is so protective of its material, why doesn't it keep it to itself? If their literature is so confidential why does it have JW's trudge from door to door trying to "place" it in the people's hands? Years from now they will be embarrassed by what they pass off as truth today. No wonder they don't want people to know what they wrote in the past! It's not about copyright. They don't want the public to see this info, pure and simple. They can't take justified criticism, but they love to dish it out to other religions.

  
  

  
  If musicians are so protective of their music, why do they sue people for copying it? If authors like JK Rowling are so strict with use of Harry Potter items, why did she write and release her books about Harry Potter. This is where copyright comes into play, you see, we have the ability to say what we want and if we want those statements protected, we copyright it. Remember, a copyright is only as powerful as your willingness to fight it. Some people get copyrights, get infringed on, and do nothing. Why? They can not afford the battle in court. Her is an example from my own life.

  I worked for a company in my young Witness days that built an item used in logging. The man who owned the rights was an ass, total ass. He had a guy on the other side of the country building something that was kind of close, but not really even the same product as ours. He was afraid this guy would hurt his business, so he sued him for copyright infringement. He did not just do this once, but rather he did it over and over again. Until this man who was a small time business closed his doors and gave up. Not because he did what he was accused of, and he never lost in court, he just could not afford to do battle in court with his limited amount of income and did not want to die a poor man.

  Is quoting the Bible subject to copyright too?

  Depends on what version you quote. The NEW WORLD TRANSLATION is copyrighted. Although, with so many versions out there that sound like it, you would have to show a large percentage to be shown as copying the NWT. The Watchtower sues people over their works all the time. They are very protective. Which is normal for any organization that shows cult like traits.
• 

  Odrade

  Someone else mentioned the battles fought by people trying to expose Scientology. This site, though owned by a person in Norway ( http://www.xenu.net/ ) and has gone through some copyright challenges himself.

  He suggests the help of these people: http://www.chillingeffects.org/ whose main page statement says in part:

  Do you know your online rights? Have you received a letter asking you to remove information from a Web site or to stop engaging in an activity? Are you concerned about liability for information that someone else posted to your online forum? If so, this site is for you.

  Chilling Effects aims to help you understand the protections that the First Amendment and intellectual property laws give to your online activities. We are excited about the new opportunities the Internet offers individuals to express their views, parody politicians, celebrate their favorite movie stars, or criticize businesses. But we've noticed that not everyone feels the same way. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some individuals and corporations are using intellectual property and other laws to silence other online users. Chilling Effects encourages respect for intellectual property law, while frowning on its misuse to "chill" legitimate activity.

  This article is about the efforts of these corporation to get this type of information deleted from online archives.

  I don't know if any of it will help, but the "Chilling Effects" group sounds like a good one.

  Good luck with the battle, and know that I (among many others) would like to help in some way if possible.