The Watchtower Society is good at intimidation. It uses fear to maintain control of it's members, including fear of being destroyed at Armageddon and fear of shunning and being rejected by family and friends. They even try to intimidate former members by threatening them with lawsuits over copyright issues, as an example. Very few people are willing or able to endure a drown out legal struggle with the Watchtower Society, regardless of the legal merits of the case or chances of eventual victory.
Could this situation be concealing a profound weakness in the Watchtower Society's legal position? I should disclose that I'm not a lawyer and I'm not qualified to give legal advice. I'm just speculating about possible situations that could cause serious problems for the Watchtower Society.
I'll try to make my point by discussing a hypothetical scenario in the United States. An elder posts the new elders manual online. He posts it on his own website and doesn't even try to hide the fact that he is responsible for distributing that copyrighted work. He is soon disfellowshipped and threatened with legal action if he doesn't stop distributing that book.
It would be crazy for that elder to persist in distributing an entire copyrighted book. The law is pretty clear on that being copyright infringement. Suppose, for whatever reason (perhaps he has a terminal illness), he refuses to back down. The Watchtower Society sues him, while trying to avoid publicity for their secret elder's manual.
The disfellowshipped elder then alerts the media about this case and uses a novel legal defense. He says that this is an internal religious dispute and claims the court has no constitutional right to interfere. He points to something in the Watchtower literature to support the idea that he has a right and responsibility to distribute this information. (It probably doesn't matter if his reasons are compelling because, in theory, this would be internal religious matter that the courts couldn't investigate.)
This may be a clear case of copyright infringement, but it's a moot point if the courts are unable to interfere. The Watchtower Society has used this same defense to avoid having the courts investigate lawsuits against them where there may be clear violations of the law in terms of slander, medical liability, etc.
If this legal defense worked, it would be a major public embarrassment for the Watchtower Society. Perhaps they would appeal and argue that don't have religious freedom if they can't use the courts to enforce their legal rights under copyright law. They would have a point, although they would likely downplay that fact that many of those who have tried to sue them could make a similar argument.
If that legal defense failed (which I think would be likely), then it could be even more problematic for the Watchtower Society. Suppose that disfellowshipped elder turned right around and sued the Watchtower Society for damages related to his disfellowshipping (perhaps loss of business and damage to his reputation, etc.) I'm sure the Watchtower Society would use the same legal defense that they argued against during the first lawsuit. It would be a hard sell since they are both dealing with the same general situation.
If the courts were consistent and decided that there were compelling reasons to hear both cases, then this could be a precedent that would open a floodgate of lawsuits concerning enforced shunning, deaths from their blood policies and so forth.
The Watchtower Society likes to have their cake and eat it too. They have no problem fighting for their rights while trampling on the rights of others and seeking immunity from lawsuits under the pretense of religious freedom. They have done a good job of maintaining this unfair advantage so far, but I wonder if they will someday have a rude awakening.
What do you think?