Help! Mike & Kim videos all being deleted by Youtube (page 13)

Fisherman

Exactly. The WT's actions concerning the alleged copyright violations are a clear example of how perverted the intellectual property laws have become over the last several decades, especially since digital transmission became possible.

When WT or anybody else legally owns a copyright or anything else they like, and if for whatever reason OC doesn't like, wt or anybody else feels that someone is infringing or encroaching on what is legally theirs, they have the legal right ( in almost every country on earth I presume) to go to the authorities (whether Orphan Crow likes it or not. ) The authorities will determine how to handle it and decide what is just and proper -not the presumptuous self anointed judge, Orphan Crow who doesn't even bother to read all of the posts on this thread before going on a rant with me, same as she does in every thread with me before having to swallow her words then backing off. Orphan Crow, learn something; whether or not I tag team with anybody or am eating potato chips or Stephane Laliberte is killing chickens, doesn't add or subtract from the validity of my posts on the subject.

This thread ain't about wt being morally right or wrong about blood transfusions.

WT is using and misusing the law to oppress, misinform, hide, obfuscate, lie....well, you get the idea

I don't get the idea but your statement is being read by a lot of people and could be construed as an accusation by someone and someone could require you to show cause.

You know who you and Laliberte remind me of Orphan Crow? The BLM people who justify the destruction of property and looting because such actions bring publicly to their cause.

We are just having a friendly discussion here, relax. I have the same rights to my views as you do and so does wt.

Fisherman

But they also have to deal with the consequences. -John Davis

But Laliberte strongly believes that such consqences are immoral because KM are doing things for a moral cause ( getting back at wt) and KM cause makes the consqences immoral.

OC post challenges wt motives and feels wt has no right to the copyright because wt motives are wrong in her eyes and wt should do with wt copyright what OC says because she is morally and legally right and because the law is perverted.

Can you argue with that?!!!

StephaneLaliberte

Fisherman: But Laliberte strongly believes that such consqences are immoral because KM are doing things for a moral cause ( getting back at wt) and KM cause makes the consqences immoral.

That`s pretty much it. Glad you can see my point.

Fisherman

That`s pretty much it. Glad you can see my point.

You want to do whatever the heck you want and believe that it is immoral to stop you. We'll just see then what happens after to your morality if it pretty much gets to the point when all those immoral people wearing black robes sitting on benches force you to stop by making you volunteer at the local park nearby to push up daisies -if that's what it takes to stop you in the meantime.

konceptual99

Without wanting to get into the two wrongs argument it should be noted that the WTS' use of the work of others is rife with misquotes, quote mining and in some instances out and out plagiarism. They don't even quote their own literature accurately.

http://www.nairaland.com/1498593/watchtower-exposed-disgusting-pliagarism-hardcore

https://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/misquotes-deception-lies.php

My point here is that the WTS presents a less than shining example in the use of others work yet they are clear ready to play the moral high ground card when use of their own content shows them up. I think that the type of use seen in M&Ks' material could be argued to be "fair use", especially when some of the content is not even the WT's to claim copyright over however the WT's ability to employ double standards know no bounds.

sparrowdown

Are the elders letters copyrighted? Because personally, I think the thing that would be pissing WT off the most about K&M is the reading out of the elder's letters. WT would absolutely hate that, it would be a matter of principle to them even though there's usually not that much damning info in elders letters that would be of interest to anyone other than ex-jws. They would hate their privacy protocols breached in such a way.

I don't know I 'm just guessing.

Agree with konceptual bout the double standards of WT.

StephaneLaliberte

Fisherman: We'll just see then what happens after to your morality if it pretty much gets to the point when all those immoral people wearing black robes sitting on benches force you to stop by making you volunteer at the local park nearby to push up daisies -if that's what it takes to stop you in the meantime.

You keep shifting the attention to the legal consequences and keep purposefully dodging the motives of the Watchtower to uphold its rights, if, indeed rights it has by the way.

I asked you a very simple question in previous posts: Why does it bother the watchtower, the harm that is caused to the watchtower. You deviated from the obvious answer and keep going right back to what is legal and not.

When a religion is involved in a conflict, morality CANNOT be avoided. The "one true religion" should be a light for the world and morality at the center of everything it does. Hence, motivation for actions come into play.

The only actual answer to this question was provided by Orphan Crow. You than proceeded to send insults at him and me without ever answering that question yourself.

Concerning the courts, JWs are not "allowed" to bring each other to court. Point is, even the JW recognize that it may not be the right course of action to bring someone to court. For instance, I once was wronged by 25,000$ by a friend. However, he ended up dying of cancer. What was I to do? Bring his widow to court? I could have; I just didn't believe it was the moral thing to do.

What I am saying is that WT bringing to court people who expose their lies, regardless of their legal rights to do it, even if such rights exists, is wrong and reprehensible.

OrphanCrow

Fisherman: Orphan Crow who doesn't even bother to read all of the posts on this thread before going on a rant with me,

You don't know this, fisherman. You have ass-u-med something that just isn't true. I read this entire thread and I watched every single minute of the loooong video that was at the core of the takedown notice.

I also read these (most of these...still reading them):

Gutenberg's Legacy: Copyright, Censorship, andReligious Pluralism by Thomas F. Cotter

In Search of (Maintaining) the Truth: The Use ofCopyright Law by Religious Organizations David A. Simon

And this article:

and this one: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericgoldman/2015/09/21/you-cant-buy-a-copyright-just-to-bury-it/#a350992b1189

etc

So, Fisherman...you are wrong. I don't comment unless I have done my background work. And on this issue, I have

same as she does in every thread with me before having to swallow her words then backing off.

I don't "back off"...I usually just don't have anything more to say to you.

So, fisherman, I am not "backing off". I am busy....those links have some good reading in them about copyright and how religions use copyright law for censorship

Fisherman

Agree with konceptual bout the double standards of WT.

Whether or not wt actually used copyrighted material without authorization in the past is not a legal defense nor a justification for KM to infringe on wt copyright. Using your standard though, everybody should be allowed to infringe on KM based on them using wt copyright and it would be a double standard in they protected their property. According to your standard, it is open game on KM.

jp1692

Orphan Crow, thank you for posting those links to the articles and papers on copyright and how some individuals and organizations have used copyright laws, not to protect their intellectual rights, but to suppress legitimate criticism.

Very thought-provoking.

Help! Mike & Kim videos all being deleted by Youtube

Share this