pdf's of Raymond Franz's books (page 22)

Oubliette

SBF: I would like to buy the rights for both books for $8000 US

Why are you making this public?

Contact the copyright holder and try to negotiate with them.

Well this got chippy. Jonathan do you really think that is a fair assessment of what is happening? Why does it have to be put into terms of liking Cedars or not? Can you not see why there is concern that Cedars or his companions have taken it upon themselves to make available at whatever cost a copyrighted book? I for one love Cedars work on JWSurvey. Does that allow me to say his bragging about bootleg copies of a copyrighted book and offering the services of his printer doesn't set well with me? That it IS off putting? Attempts at defending his choices only exacerbates the issue. There is no defending it. At this moment, if Cedars put out a video that said, "hey guys, I really made a huge blunder in my excitement and I want to apologize for it", that would endear me to him more. But to come out guns blasting and using red herrings, straw man, and ad hominem? It is embarrassing. It is disappointing. It is deflating in contrast to the amazing work he does with his blog or whatever it is. Can you at least understand that is how some of us feel?

slimboyfat

I don't have contact details. I've sent a few PMs with no success. Plus I am willing to pay $8000 not more. If someone wants to pay more I don't mind. At least it would get things moving. So I see no harm making my offer public.

slimboyfat

...unless they would prefer discretion. I see what you mean. I never thought of that.

Anyway it is what it is. I'm interested in paying a modest amount to get ownership and get things moving.

Jonathan Drake

Some people are refusing to accept the law is as it is and want to claim it can and should be ignored.

This is really the only part of your response to me I disagree with. Because nobody, I don't think anyway and I know I can speak for myself if nothing else, is claiming the law is what it is; it certainly wasn't my intention though in frustration I may very well have chosen my words poorly. When I was posting on this, and I've no intention of doing so again but I don't want to just ignore you, my point was not what the law does or doesn't say, but rather that nobody posting in this thread is actually qualified to know what the law means or how it is to be applied.

You could very well be completely wrong in your understanding of how this law reads. I'm NOT saying I am right about anything I said, only that you or I or everyone could me completely incorrect.

Nobody here has a law degree, the closes to it is Orphan crow and they don't even have one they just assume what their acquaintances told them applies here as well - they don't KNOW, they assume.

Everyone is pretending to know things they don't know and making a huge deal. It's absolutely ridiculous, and that was my only point, although I too fell for the personal jabs and such and got a little more involved than originally intended.

the girl next door

And what makes you think OC is the only one with "closest to it" law degree? Because she opened up about it? Interesting. I would appreciate a response to my comment above.

Jonathan Drake

And what makes you think OC is the only one with "closest to it" law degree? Because she opened up about it? Interesting.

I used the phrase because she (I assume you know orphan is a woman), stated she dealt with copyright issues at university and has spoken to a lawyer about this - that makes her input the closest to being worth anything. Everyone else has just been talking a lot of nothing. And yes that includes me.

Jonathan Drake

Girl Next Door,

as i stated to Simon in private message, I do see both sides of this.

My reaction is tempered by looking at the outcome. If I get all pissed and start a discussion about some nameless person who has done something I disagree with (and I don't disagree btw) and follow the model of this thread it does three things:

1. It's about cedars and literally everyone knows it.

2. Divisiveness.

It may be that you personally have no qualms with cedars and separate the man from this particular action which doesn't quite sit well with you. That is your right, take it to HIM and have it out. Chances are you'll have to agree to disagree and move on.

But no, it's not been taken to him it's been brought here to bleed all over everyone's minds. And that is ALL that is happening. Nonsense about how terrible it is, "oh boo hoo cedars did a thing I don't like." "Everyone look at my opinion of this thing someone did and see how bad he is." That is what this is about. It's a pointless thread. And

3. it accomplishes making certain that every lurking dub that registers sees that watchtower is 100% right about apostates and runs to the nearest elder.

So yes, this is absolutely about cedars. Everyone who says it isn't is being intellectually dishonest. This is about cedars, about the several members here who don't like him, and this questionable action (I grant it's questionable) gives each of these members a chance to CONFIRM THEIR BIAS.

Thats what this is. It shouldn't have happened, and this thread should at least die if it must exist at all.

Simon

This is really the only part of your response to me I disagree with

Sorry I wasn't clear, that part wasn't in response to you.

1009: I'm not interested in you promoting your Pirate Party here so future posts will be removed.

As to people needing a law degree to be able to comment or have any clue on what the law is - that is simply untrue. Anyone can educate themselves to any legislation. They are probably not best served representing themselves in anything but simply and straightforward cases (where precedent and prior knowledge of process counts for a lot) but copyright law is one of those things that is pretty clear and simple.

Trying to claim that everyone must be wrong because we don't have a law degree is clutching at straws.

Finally, it's about cedars because certain people Jonathan Drake make it about him at every opportunity. So I would ask that you please stop doing it,

Jonathan Drake

Trying to claim that everyone must be wrong because we don't have a law degree is clutching at straws.

Everyone read this. Both sides of this argument read these words.

this is confirmation bias. This is PROOF of what I'm saying. And it's proof that I'm also correct about the very thing Simon is saying I'm wrong about.

i absolutely did not say anywhere at all that everyone must be wrong because they don't have a law degree. What I said was that everyone COULD be wrong and nobody is willing to admit this. This fact being true, that nobody is willing to admit the possibility of misunderstanding or being wrong in their interpretation, belies what is REALLY happening here.

People are pretending to know things they don't know, and assuming their BELIEF about being right is true. They take an unfalsifiable stand in unreason and attack any efforts to diminish it.

That is exactly what is happening. It's exactly what happened right here. And it's happening because cedars is involved and he must be wrong, regardless of if he is.

i like all of you. I have nothing against you. But some of you are being completely unreasonable.

pdf's of Raymond Franz's books

Share this