Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

by the girl next door 125 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • TD

    Just tell me you understand what I mean and that everything will be ok.

    I do understand your point and I do understand the dilemma created by the scenario you propose.

    But I also think there is a profound ethical inequality at work here.

  • the girl next door
    the girl next door
    It is my hope that Deborah Dykstra maintains control over the copyright of Ray's books and publishes them again independently and without attachment to any other entities. Time will tell.

    I also think there is a profound ethical inequality at work here. .....TD

    Image result for Hi-Ho Hi Ho

  • OrphanCrow

    And another thing about the essence of copyright law - it was put in place to stimulate creative growth and development. By protecting existing creative work, the copyright demands that new work be made, and that the creative process continues to unfold.

    Copying and distributing the WTS elders manual (and other secret documents) is not being done for the purpose of stopping other creative work from being produced. It may be being used to stop the WTS from its practices that violate human rights' issues...but the action of apostates circulating that copyrighted material does not impede the construction of further creative works of its kind. Therefore, the resistance act of copying the WTS secret material and distributing it does not violate the copyright in principle.

    If it can be proven that someone is copying the WTS material and redistributing it for the same purpose it was originally intended for, as an organizational structural rule book, and bypass making their own book...that would be a different matter and would, indeed, violate the copyright.

  • OrphanCrow

    And another thing...while I am on my copyright soap box...

    About the copyright extending past Ray's death. I have read many comments that reflect the attitude that the work should lose its protected status after the author is dead. Previously, I had made the argument that a copyright protection assures the right of inheritance to the heirs. But, that extension functions in a couple other ways, too.

    Firstly, the extension gives assurance to the principle I discussed in my last post - that the creative process continues to develop within our culture.

    Secondly, it gives some measure of protection to the creator of the work themselves - it assures them that someone can't come and knock them off just for the purpose of forcing their creative material into the common space. A 50 year span past death (different lengths for different cases) also is an insurance clause for the author of the work. So they don't get killed for their creativity.

    So... for all of you who say "...the guy is dead now...I don't owe him anything." Well, yeah...but you owe society something - you owe "us" what the copyright principle of creative license was put in place for - the stimulation and development of creative works. The copyright act is there for everybody - for the good of all culture.

    I'll sit down now.

  • Designer Stubble
    Designer Stubble
    I think a lot of persons did not violate copyright because it belonged to Ray. If the WT were to buy the rights, illegal copies would go viral.
  • DarioKehl

    If watchtower bought the copyrights to CoC... opinion? I have no idea what would happen with that.

    but here's what I do know. with precision and 100% accuracy, I make the following statement, not as a bold assertion, but as irrefutable fact:

    mike and kim would go out of their way searching for another "scandal" to target cedars with and to fan the flames that foment discord among fellow exjws because that's what mike and kim do. They are poison, they are trouble makers and, in my opinion based on observation, they have social disorders and mental issues. In every hypothetical scenario, they'd be there doing the same shitty things with their same shitty attitudes with their same shitty daughter and douchebag husband (who are both just as nuts, in my opinion) on their same shitty videos.

    they are like westboro: only relevant as long as we continue discussing them. By discussing them, we legitimize them. They're not legitimate; they're illegitimate, spiteful, ill mannered degenerates who've done more harm than good. One of these days, mike and kim will declare war on the wrong enemy and they'll be exposed for who they really are.

    Ill get get the popcorn ready because that'll be one hell of an enjoyable thing to see.

  • cappytan
    I wonder if the people perpetuating this pearl clutching have ever heard of the Streisand Effect...
  • OrphanCrow
    Designer Stubble: If the WT were to buy the rights, illegal copies would go viral.

    If the WTS bought the copyright for the purpose of suppressing it or altering it, I would be the first in line to flood the world with copies of Ray's book. And I wouldn't be at all concerned of the legal consequences of my actions.

    For anyone who cares to pursue this, the following article deals with exactly that issue - the buying of a copyright for the purposes of censorship:

    Copyright as censorship? Katz v. Chevaldina

    And for a detailed brief explaining why someone cannot buy copyright for the purposes of suppression:

    If the WTS chose to buy the copyright for Ray's book and use it in the same way that Ray intended - to publish and circulate his books in its original form and content, well...I would say...good, all the more power to them.

  • OrphanCrow

    Oh...and by the way, the brief that I linked to could be used to challenge the take down orders that YouTube is giving to people who post WT material for the purposes of criticism.

    YouTube is responsible for ensuring that the takedown order is legitimate. The WT requests for takedown, based on some perceived copyright infringement, are not legitimate.

    The copying and distribution of WTS material is not a violation of copyright laws if the intended purpose is for the criticism of the WT.

    The pitting of the WT copyright against Ray Franz's book copyright is a non-sequitir debate.

Share this