Can I flesh it out? Well it was just a stab in the dark.
I have no idea why Watchtower is successful in taking down public entries that they claim infringes copyright or their motivations to do so except for the obvious.
Because copyright is irrespective of tangible loss.
Negative expose of their copyright material hurts their bottom line. Members. Members donate. Lose members, lose money. How can I flesh it out any more?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but on the surface, it sounds like you were attempting to establish an ethical equivalency, so flesh it out via a little detail. It what way is the exposure negative? How would it hurt their bottom line? Why would members leave?
If the argument could be made, do you think it would have applied to Franz, who included a wealth of offical letters, internal memos, etc. in CofC?