by Juan Viejo2 90 Replies latest jw friends
So, let me get this straight, they copyright their BOE letters? Do most corporations copyright their correspondence? My company's correspondence is pretty much always by email with a warning about unauthorized recipients at the bottom.
I'm just wondering if this is normal, or if the BOE letters are legally copyrighted. (I'm not sure if that's the right word or not)
Is there an indication on the letter that it is copyrighted material? I'm sure there will be on every future letter.
I love it how all of us mentally diseased apostates are getting under their skin.
Oh the cat and mouse games!! You just have to be smarter than they are!
A copyright notice is not necessary, (although it's generally a good idea). Copyright laws concern intellectual properties.
It seems an unusual assertion from the WTBTS to claim copyright infringement concerning the unauthorized dissemination of a business letter, but as the authors of it, they would have the exclusive right to make copies and authorize who may or may not do so.
The reality is that the WTBTS simply does not want their internal documents made public for reasons that are hopefully obvious. When those documents are made public it exposes them in a variety of ways. They don't want this so they do what lawyers do: exploit any and all legal theories to get their way.
A copyright notice is not necessary, (although it's generally a good idea). Copyright laws concern intellectual properties.
I understand that it concerns intellectual properties, but what I am curious about is how you can claim copyright protection on something that doesn't have a copyright. And what makes it a good idea if its not necessary?
Yes I am surprised at this site, even after the well-known Quotes lawsuit in Canada (where this site's webmaster now lives). People here often post large blocks of text from other authors--not just wts but news stories. There is no reason why a link can't be posted instead, if one is available.
Also posting a quote by itself w/o including critical review is not protected.
I've been guilty of this myself & this is a good reminder.
drewcoul: how you can claim copyright protection on something that doesn't have a copyright. And what makes it a good idea if its not necessary?
You're confusing a copyright notice with ownership rights. I understand that copyrights are confusing. Also, the law varies from country to country. In the last few decades the trend has been toward an internationally consistent set of laws.
Here's a link to some information concerning US Copyright law from the US Copyright Office:
Here are a few relevant excerpts from that article:
What Is Copyright?
Copyright is a form of protection provided by the laws of the United States (title 17, U. S. Code) to the authors of “original works of authorship,” including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works. This protection is available to both published and unpublished works. Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:
• reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords
• prepare derivative works based upon the work
• distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending
• perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works
• display the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work
• perform the work publicly (in the case of sound recordings*) by means of a digital audio transmission
How to Secure a Copyright
Copyright Secured Automatically upon Creation
The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequentlymisunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright. Copyright is secured automatically when the work is created, and a work is “created” when it is fixed in a copy.
Notice of Copyright
The use of a copyright notice is no longer required under U. S. law, although it is often beneficial. Because prior law did contain such a requirement, however, the use of notice is still relevant to the copyright status of older works. - [Emphasis added]
Notice was required under the 1976 Copyright Act. This requirement was eliminated when the United States adhered to the Berne Convention, effective March 1, 1989.
Use of the notice may be important because it informs the public that the work is protected by copyright, identifies the copyright owner, and shows the year of first publication. Furthermore, in the event that a work is infringed, if a proper notice of copyright appears on the published copy or copies to which a defendant in a copyright infringement suit had access, then no weight shall be given to such a defendant’s interposition of a defense based on innocent infringement in mitigation of actual or statutory damages, except as provided in section 504(c)(2) of the copyright law. Innocent infringement occurs when the infringer did not realize that the work was protected. - [Emphasis added]
Form of Notice for Visually Perceptible Copies
The notice for visually perceptible copies should contain all the following three elements:
1. The symbol © (the letter C in a circle), or the word “Copyright,” or the abbreviation “Copr.”; and
2. The year of first publication of the work. In the case of compilations or derivative works incorporating previously published material, the year date of first publication of the compilation or derivative work is sufficient. The year date may be omitted where a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work, with accompanying textual matter, if any, is reproduced in or on greeting cards, postcards, stationery, jewelry, dolls, toys, or any useful article; and
3. The name of the owner of copyright in the work, or an abbreviation by which the name can be recognized, or a generally known alternative designation of the owner.
Example: © 2011 John Doe
Again, I'm not sure that copyright law would apply to an internal document such as a business letter. That seems to be a stretch. It wouldn't be the first time the WTBTS tried to make such a claim.
They're bullies. Bullies gotta' bully!
00DAD
The reality is that the WTBTS simply does not want their internal documents made public for reasons that are hopefully obvious._____00DAD
Ok, I'll stick to the external
" If you see the opportunity for further discussion at another time, give the person some reason to look forward to it. Ask a question, perhaps one discussed in the Reasoning from the scriptures book or a publication designed for conducting home Bible studies."________Benefit from Theocratic Ministry school Education book page 222
LIKE
" WHY DO JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SAY THAT IT WAS IN 1914 THAT THE " LAST DAYS " BEGIN ?
The year 1914 is marked by Bible prophecy."_______Reasoning from the Scriptures book page 239
Oops, Bible chronology was wrong , stay tuned for " NEW LIGHT "
.
.
wasblind - You're so right. There's plenty of stuff in their public-ations that exposes their errors, lies and hypocrisy.
But we gotta' keep in mind an important aspect of the mentality of the WT Leaders: They're Control Freaks!
Controllers gotta' control. It's what they do.
When they create something that is only meant to be an internal, private correspondence and it becomes public that infuriates them. Why? Because they can't control it.
It's all about the loss of control. It's doubly damaging that it further exposes flawed, damaging policies.
This brings up a couple of questions I'd like to address to JuanViejo2:
Just a thought!
00DAD
I downloaded the PDF document containing all the BOE letters from 1981 - 2012 - but the mysterious letter which caused the fertilizer to hit the air-circulating implement is not included for some reason.
Can someone point me in the right direction, to satisfy my curiosity, but mainly to give me further ammo for future reference?
Thanks for any help.
