by mickbobcat 35 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Gorby Vienne is a great researcher of WT history. Please respect her.
It's not Vienne, Gorby. So sadly she passed away from cancer.
It's her kid daughter who enjoys playing devil's advocate.
I have teen kids and I'm really sorry you lost your mum, but I think at this stage your behaviour is getting close to the kind of self hurting stuff I see from boarderline girls. You worry me kid. Have you got someone you can talk to?
Happy Dad mickbobcat,
For you to call Vienne a troll just goes to show how ignorant and uninformed you are. You haven't been around long enough to know many of the "better" posters and call them something derogatory. Do your research before putting your foot in mouth
Again, Vienne passed away some time ago. This is her young daughter who does enjoy trolling usđ
I believe in patent and copyright law. People need to get paid for their work
isnât the watchtower a â non profitâ... what money were they hoping to make from this? Wasnât the âworkâ done by unpaid volunteers? Isnât getting the good news out there by any means, their main goal?
Just for the record as a writer I made less than $3000 last year.
Copyright infringement is not about money its about ownership. I can't steal your car just because its a 1980 Chevette and you'd have to pay somebody to haul it away. A lot of that free stuff on the net is there because either the artist/writer/singer wants it there, or the copyright has expired and its in the public domain.
If get what youâre saying but by that logic, if someone took a photo or video of my 1980 Chevette and posted it online, Iâd still own it and it would have the same value or possibly more if so if someone saw it and just had to have it at any price.
Not a nice thing to do but he person posting the watchtower video likely wasnât claiming to own or or have produced it nor is it likely they were making a profit. The Watchtower thinks everything they do is a huge holy secret.
copyright infringement isn't about 'owning' the material. It's theft. It's use of someone else's work for your own ends. It's morally wrong.
I watched Lloyd's video about it yesterday. Apparently the JWs themselves put their video out prematurely, a music video they're going to use to bring down the house and close out their summer cult convention. But they released it by accident on their website, then some pro-JW channels picked it up and shared it because they liked it. Watchtower is actually going after those pro-JW channels to get it taken down based on copyright reasons, but they are the ones that put it out, thus leaking their own material.
Lloyd has the music video in his video commentary about it. It was as dumb as their usual content.
Dio, having an opinion different from yours does not make me a troll. You do not like it that someone can stand up to your nonsense. Your reasoning is faulty on several grounds. Freely sharing work does not cancel copyright and it does not give anyone else the right to misuse it or use it without permission. You may want it to be so. But it is not so in law. Disagreeing with you does not make me a troll. Your response shows you have no refutation only ad hominem.
Many authors share their work 'for free' though contests and giveaways. That's especially so among those published independently or by a 'small press.' Doing so does not cancel copyright. You hate the Watchtower. That's fine. But this issue extends past the Watchtower. It is a creator's right to within the law protect their intellectual property. That you wish it was not so in the Watchtower's case does not change that. Stealing another's work for your own ends is immoral and it is theft. Do you support theft?
If get what youâre saying but by that logic, if someone took a photo or video of my 1980 Chevette and posted it online, Iâd still own it and it would have the same value or possibly more if so if someone saw it and just had to have it at any price.
That picture belongs to whoever took it. The copyrights belong to the photographer and were created as soon as he took it. There maybe privacy issues, depending on where he took the picture, but that is a separate area of law. Whether or not you gained or lost money is irrelevant to who owns the copyright and what they can do with it.
An aside to everybody on discussions like this: neither the WTBS nor the legal system is required to think and act logically.
Thanks for the information about Vienne. Did not know that!
Gorby
