by Bangalore 94 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Looking at http://www.desinger.com/scriptures/letter.html contains this quote from the Legal department. Since when are links not legal?
Also, we note that you have a link to Watchtower’s official site, www.watchtower.org. So that there is no misperception that Watchtower has some connection with your site, we ask that you please remove this link.
The logo and page layout of Examining the Scriptures Daily is the exact same as Phillip Garridos internet blog
It seems like this template is a basic blogspot template that is used by many blogs.
Its cool, just "paraphrase" the crap.
I think that once you make any information public, like a public domain website, you are gonna have a hard time winning a judge's favour, but the problem is the price of the legal battle, not that there will be much of one.
They are probably going after smaller ones that they know won't put up a fight.
Of course the WT shoudl be careful, if they set a precedent then maybe all those authors thay have misquoted over the years may ecide to sue THEIR ass !
Guess this website is next to get contacted by the Watchtower http://kat-examiningthescripturesdaily.blogspot.com/
Or how about this one? http://e-jehovahs-witnesses.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=18
Or this one? http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=108023156866
Or this one? http://www.jwdailytext.com/
Or this one? http://www.jwsearch.com
Guess there is panic at Bethel now...
Question is what the Legal department would allow. Would it allow to only post todays daily text and not have any archive. Would that be considered as a quote?
How much can you quote from their copyrighted Bible? One verse, two or more? Where do they draw the line? What if you had a blog that quoted a scripture daily? I guess they (or you, as we all know that they read this website too at Brooklyn) would jump on that too. They are roaming the Internet like a "roaring lion, seeking to devour".
Examining the Scriptures Daily is not bible study, it's a cheap rehash of previous Watchtower articles.
And that's the problem: There are two Watchtowers now, the Public and the Super-Secret Koolaid Kult version.
If they're quoting from a Koolaid article, the general public might just learn how irrational, non-Biblical and un-Christian the "internal" doctrines really are.
~Sue
They are starting to follow the same pattern as the Scientologist lawyers. Overly protective slams on copyrighted material.
Knowledge is hurting the Scientology and knowledge is hurting the WTS.
GB - "Must .......stop..... knowledge, .......must stop ....at all cost! Knowledge making ....us ....weaker......we are getting weaker....weaker.."
i know of a witness that had the daily text on their myspace page and that witness had a talkin to to take it down....the witness had good intentions because they had so many friends on there and wanted to blog it..and whoever read it had a witness to them....without feeling like they were "preaching" to them...i mean what's the difference between sharing with a friend the daily text and blogging it on a social networking page....i mean "apostates" even get a copy of the daily text and everything else....and yeah i honestly don't think there's a difference with posting an article you like from the magazines and sharing it with a friend...i wonder if anyone ever posted just scriptures from the NWT and were asked to take it down
Looks like Information Control is one of the WT tactics. Even if the information is from the WT's own publications.
Bangalore
I guess the socalled supersecret Watchtower non-public edition cannot be that secret after all.
Everybody can upload it from the societys own site.
Hi Purps...it looks like the Garrido site used the same website template as the EDS site.
TYA
