Quotes, You must have really pissed them off. LOL Good for you! Can you move your website to the U.S.A.? If your website was registered in the U.S. it may not be as easy for the WT to try to silence your freedoms of speech and press. Also, the WT is praised for winning legal cases fighting for civil rights and freedoms of expression, but then turns around and trys to silence your freedoms. The WT is a giant self serving Pharisee. Try are trying to ruin you for exposing them. Don't let them scare you. Look into moving your operation to the U.S.
Watch Tower sues Quotes for $100,000 plus plus plus...
by Quotes 354 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
VM44
If the material on the Watchtower CD is for Jehovah's Witnesses only, then how can a person, who is NOT a Witness, truly make an informed decision to become a Jehovah's Witness if this material is not accessible to them?
In order to have intelligent public examination of the beliefs held to by the Jehovah's Witnesses, their literature, as published by The Watchtower, HAS to be quoted! Quotes' website provides quotations to an extent sufficient to understand the quotations in their context, so that a person reading them may understand what The Watchtower is saying.
For The Watchtower to deny the existence of websites like Quotes is for them to deny public examination and discourse of their beliefs from a source independent of their organization. Without such a website as Quotes, a person CANNOT make an informed decision to join the Jehovah's Witness religion as the person would only the information presented by The Watchotwer organization to influence them in making their decision to join or not.
Quotes' website is an essential resource for anyone attempting to make an impartial evaluation of the Jehovah's WItness beliefs, as published by The Watchtower.
--VM44
-
VM44
Also, Quotes actually makes an original contribution by his choice of and arrangement of the material he puts up on his website. --VM44
-
VM44
I wonder if The Watchtower has considered the consequences if [or rather, when!] they lose this case against Quotes?They will have succeeded in generating quite a lot of publicity that will not put them in a good light!
Is this lawsuit really a good use of the organizations time and energy, considering how very late we are in this system of things?
--VM44
-
fairchild
Quotes,
After your site was shut down a few months back, I did some thinking, and especially some research into the fair use issue. With fair use being the most complicated part of copyrights, it can be twisted and turned. I honestly believe that you have not violated the rules of fair use.
Your major disadvantage in this situation is that the WTS has more money than you do, and as we all know, money talks. On the other hand, your advantage is that you (we) have a louder voice. I'd say.. use it. There are numerous people here, willing to let you know how much they appreciate your site. Many voices, speaking at once do not go unheard.
As for the copyright infringement, I must admit that I did not read the entire letter as time is not my friend today, but I did scan through it. I don't see anywhere that they have suffered financial loss because of your site, nor have YOU had any financial gain by displaying the quotes from their magazines. When there is no financial loss or gain to both parties, a copyright case often gets settled with a slap on the wrist.
The way your site has been set up, with specific references to the source of the quotes, you should be safe, imho. There is also another issue which could be in your favor. The magazines were written by different people. The rightful owner of the copyrights would be the "owner" of the company in whose name the articles were written. In other words, the president of the WTBS. But how long has the current "president" been the head of the WTBS for? (sorry, I'm a bit out of the loop). Who exactly can claim copyrights for articles, written over 50 years ago? Aren't they in public domain by now?
At last, two tips.. make sure this reaches a large public. They might have slapped themselves in the face by starting a lawsuit. Fight back, make this known everywhere.
Use us if you can. Every voice counts. Any place we can send fanmail to? A petition perhaps?
-
VM44
The lawyer makes a misrepresentation, the International Bible Students were NOT Jehovah's Witnesses.
The term "Jehovah's Witnesses" was invented in 1931 by Rutherford, before that year they were known as "Bible Students".
Is this merely a change in the name used to reference this religious group? No! As the beliefs of the "Bible Students" were based upon the writings of Charles T. Russell. There are today several groups that still hold to the teachings of CT Russell, and trace their own origins to the original "Bable Students" who met while Charles Russell was still alive.
When J.F. Rutherford took over The Watchtower after CT Russell died, changes in doctrine were made over time that deviated significantly from the original teachings of Russell.
The mere fact that The Watchtower was published by the same corporate entity before and after the change from "Bible Students" to "Jehovah's Witnesses" is irrelevant, as the issue is what is believed, rather than who owns the property and who publishes the magazines!
--VM44
-
Nathan Natas
In a previous case they claimed that Jehovah was editor of the WT - so surely only Jehovah HIMSELF can bring an action.
HAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!
I think that needs to be submitted at discovery!!
Yes, this was during the OLIN MOYLE trial."Q. Who subsequently becamse the Editor of the magazine, the main editor of the "Watch Tower" magazine ?
A. In 1931, October 15th, as I recall, the "Watch Tower" discontinued publishing the names of any editorial committee on the second page.
THE COURT: He asked you who became the editor.
THE WITNESS: And it said --
THE COURT: Who became the editor ?
Q. Who became the editor when this was discontinued ?
A. Jehovah God."
-
Sunspot
I am appalled and disgusted (more than usual) at the actions of the WTS. I am very active in showing the WTS up for what it really is and what they are (and have been) doing to countless people worldwide.
I must admit that I enjoy the "Quote's" site and use it at least three or four times a day when writing my rebuttals during debates with JWs who like to say, "WE never taught that!"
I cannot imagine NOT having the site to "work from" as I put away the fools that try to defend their "Mother". If getting the word out about this ridiculous lawsuit is what is wanted, I am already busy on it. I agree that the MORE people see what they are attempting to do----the better!
I submitted this just before I logged on to JWD:
*****"A religion that teaches lies cannot be true."
The Watchtower December 1, 1991 p. 7*****"The Watchtower… invites careful and critical examination of its contents in the light of the Scriptures." *** Watchtower August 15, 1950 p. 263 Name and Purpose of The Watchtower ***
*****"It is not religious persecution for an informed person to expose publicly a certain religion as being false, thus allowing persons to see the difference between false religion and true religion." *** Watchtower November 15, 1963 p.688 Execution of Divine Judgment upon False Religion ***
*****"We have no quarrel with any one who wants to seek truth through other channels. We would not refuse to treat one as a brother because he did not believe the Society is the Lord's channel. If others see it in a different way, that is their privilege. There should be full liberty of conscience.*** Watchtower April 1, 1920, pp100, 101 ***
(No? Then why does the WTS teach the JWs to shun those who wish to merely leave the Organization when they discover their false beliefs? Why does the WTS seek to punish [SUE] someone who is simply quoting what they have already said???)
What TOTALLY DISGUSTING COWARDS....in the biblical senses, of course.
I have more places to go and more submissions like this to post....
Wishing you all the very BEST for your hard work and truly wonderful website,
hugs,
Annie edited to add that I had submitted my post under a thread that was about this stupid lawsuit. The poster of that thread is called "Yeah Right". I know you post over here too, and I would love it if you (and the other posters on that board) would PM me and let me know who you are on here! I'm not here to rat anyone out (grin) and I would enjoy secretly knowing who my fellow apostates are, under different names over on Bnet!
-
Soledad
Good job Quotes! Those bastards are scared shitless, no doubt!!
I will be keeping a close eye on this one!
-
Leolaia
I haven't seen anyone yet point out this tactic but I thought it was worth mentioning:
13. Each edition of The Watchtower and Awake! is a compilation of original literary works and artistic works. Each compilation was created by Jehovah’s Witnesses pursuant to a contract of service, in the course of a religious vocation or divine calling, with Watch Tower of Pennsylvania. Pursuant to section 13(3) of the Copyright Act, Watch Tower of Pennsylvania is the first owner of all copyright in the Religious Works as "compilations", within the meaning of s. 2 of the Copyright Act.
16. At a minimum, each Religious Work published within the last fifty years, and each literary and artistic work contained therein, is entitled to copyright in , pursuant to Section 6 of the Copyright Act.
28. The Defendant’s web site reproduces and exhibits the Plaintiffs’ Religious Works, and specifically, all or substantially all of over 450 literary and artistic works that were first published between 1955 and the present.
30. The Defendant’s purpose in operating the website is not "for the purpose of research and scholarship", as suggested on the web site. There can be no "fair dealing" when the Defendant (i) has appropriated the Plaintiffs’ trade mark for use in the domain name "watchtower.ca"; (ii) has sought to misdirect Internet users to its web site by the use of confusing Metatags; (iii) has reproduced thousands of pages from the Religious Works; (iv) has reproduced dozens of articles and dozens of pieces of artwork in their entirety;
This is supposed to hit right at any claims of "fair use", by defining the "work" as not the publication itself but a portion of it....each article or picture is a separate work. That means that if one quotes most of an article or an article in its entirety, it is construed as infringement. As we all know, some articles in the mags are very short, and it is impossible to "fairly" represent what is said without quoting the whole piece. And of course, one cannot even show any of the illustrations from the publications without infringing (by the WTBTS claim)....despite the fact that Quotes presents only low-quality versions of the images.
This is what Quotes' attorney wrote the last time the issue came up:
Your letter January 11 letter claims that "literally hundreds of pages of copyrighted material grossly exceeds the "fair dealing" provision of Canada's Copyright Act." This statement disingenuously and unfairly characterizes the material presented. The total of "hundreds of pages" of quotes at the website quotes.watchtower.ca actually represents a composite of several hundred individual quotes, from thousands of different Watch Tower publications -- publications which total (by our estimate) on the order of one quarter million (250,000) pages of material. Each quote is, by itself, reasonable under the "fair dealing" provision. A collection of "fair dealing" quotes is, in composite, still "fair dealing". Put another way, if you insist on grouping all of the quotes together (to arrive at a total of "hundreds of pages"), then you must also group together the sum total of the source material from which those quotes were taken. Doing so yields a usage of less than 0.1% of the source, which is well below generally accepted standards for "fair dealing" under the Copyright Act. It is also important to note that each quote properly cites the original source publication and page number.
It would be helpful to review what how the Canadian copyright law defines a "work"....