A thought on Quotes and the copyright thing. (page 2)

Forscher

All the points are pretty good. Thanks for responding directly Quotes. I'd be very interested in seeing that C&d order myself, and I am sure the others would be as well. So, unless you see a copyright mark as well on that ;-) I am sure we'd appreciate it if you can post it when you get it. That is if it isn't so long-winded that it would give tunnel carpal syndrome posting it! LOL

Quotes

The C&D is now posted:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/9/83334/1367780/post.ashx#1367780

Scully

Just a suggestion, Quotes....

What if you (Mr. Quotes) did not provide commentary or critique on the excerpts, but invited readers (both JW and otherwise) to critique and try to explain the excerpts in a guest book of sorts?

Forscher

Thanks for posting the order Quotes.

jwsons

In any circumsatance, they can not copyright the using of "Watchtower" (like in "Watchtower Observer" or "Quotes-Watchower") for the term "Watchtower in not for themselves. That's what they themselves wrote in the Proclaim book (WTS 1993, page 48, footnote):

"The expression "Watch Tower" is not unique to Russelll's writings or to Jehovah's Witnesses. George Storrs published a book in 1850's called The Watch Tower: Or, Man in Death; and the Hope for a Future Life. The name was also incorporated in the title of various religious periodicals. It stems from the idea of keeping on the watch for the outworking of God's purposes._Isa.21:8,11,12;Ezek. 3:17;Hab. 2:1." (quote from "Proclaim book, page 48, footnote)

And a couple of Mormons and Adventists "periodicals" had the same name

Here: http://www.lavazone2.com/dbroadhu/NY/MiscNYSE.htm#013131

Here http://www.geocities.com/le_thanh_y/W_SDA.jpg

In addition, if you use google serch engine and type "Watchtower," you will find out heaps of companies take this "Watchtower" name. Do they sue all of those companies ?

jwsons

what_Truth?

Many of those quotes should be okay. I think the statute on a corporate coyright (a work with no specific author) is 50 years, after which it becomes public domain. I know that many antiquarians take full advantage of this public domain law by scanning 100 year old books page by page and sell them on CD rom through e-bay.

Askquestions

Copy and paste this address.

This page will be able to guide you to your answers!!

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html

Badger

Confused:

I deign to disagree:

JW's have no Mother Theresa

JW's have not ever stood up politically for the rights of the disadvantage

JW's don't have any special recognition for the women that serve

JW's have not underwritten any substansial contributions to the humanities. I've been to the Stanley Theater, and nothing in it is close to the Sistine Chapel or St. Peter's. And Gregorian Chants positively rock next to Song 114.

JW's have not established centers of higher learning (or, by extension, a good college basketball program)

JW's haven't produced any appreciable philosophers in the league of Francis or Augustine (Ray Franz doesn't count...he left.)

OICU8it2

Nothing like a little adversity and persecution to get your web site known. I predict this will greatly increase the viewership of the site. Thank you for your hard work.

Scully

As mentioned by a good friend:

Just counting the magazines, the WTS publishes 24 x 32 x 2 = 1536 pages of literature per year. Even if we counted the last 50 years' worth of magazine publishing alone we are talking about 76,800 pages of printed material.

By comparison, whatever Quotes' site is using should constitute "fair use".

In fact, how are people going to see any subtle changes (ie, New Light?) unless certain articles are published in their entirety?

How much of the WTS's literature is made up of direct quotes from the Bible? Are they saying that they own the copyright on the Bible? (or just on the NWT, which would be an interesting twist in itself.)

A thought on Quotes and the copyright thing.

Share this