Lloyd is such a douche
Jehovah’s Witnesses Sue Owners of FaithLeaks for Posting 74 Convention Movies
He sure is
Wait. Isnt he the same a**hole who charged people to publish their experiences in his book??? He literally charged people to write his book for him and he has the nerve to complain about people asking for help to fight the org and then cries because he doesnt like the way the fight went?
Douche is not a strong enough word.
Yup, never heard of that before for a book, some chutzpah
The cedars channel has lots of contributors too, but only one person benefitting financially from all the work
If the owner of avoidjw only collected less than $15,000, then obviously they are going to be reluctant to take it further in case donations did not cover the likely financial loss. I’m sure Cedars is well aware that is the reason, but criticises for not taking it further regardless, and wants to see them out of pocket for some reason
Incidentally this is not the first case of its kind, is it? Are the youngsters here too new to remember the Quotes website, run by a Canadian ?
Yikes, I've defended Lloyd a lot, still think he does good work and I have no issue with people donating or paying for whatever they choose (including inclusion in a book), but those comments there are really easy to make when you're not the one facing the bill. It really sounds like he's kicking them while they're down. Not cool. I may have read it wrong but it looks like they may still be facing money damages above and beyond what they raised, and he's the one pissed off. Maybe I'm missing something but his comments are not a good look at first blush.
I wonder if Lloyd donated hoping they would win and now that Watchtower sadly kicked their asses he's worried that he's next. A lot of his work involves JW materials and videos to a large degree. Perhaps this sets a precedent that is unfavorable toward Lloyd's work. I could see that. That's why I am careful not to use their materials or anything copyrighted like songs chosen by my guests on my podcasts. It's not worth it.
I wonder how strong their case may be. Surely these films were available to members of the Public to walk in and watch at the time they were shown. I would have thought that a breach of Copyright would have to be based upon the person publishing making a Profit out of it
Copyright has nothing todo with whether you charge or profit from something (either the owner or the person violating it). It has everything todo with who's creation and intellectual property it is. The WTS has every right to control the distribution of their material in whatever way they see fit.
So they had no case - if you're posting someone else's material it's a clear case of copyright violation so fighting it would be silly.
Lloyd no doubt wanted other people to do the fighting and suffer the financial consequences of failure rather than him doing it. Watch how he changes tune when it's his money on the line.
I was about to post something on copyright, and Simon beat me to it.
Now that I'm a published and paid (well sort of) novelist, copyright has become very important to me. Copyright is not some arcane legal theory that can be stretched to fit different circumtances. It is proof of ownership. You can no more take someone's copyrighted material than you can take their car. An organization calling itself Truth and Transparency should know this and follow the rules.