OrphanCrow

Joined

• started 195 topics
• posted 4,799 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by OrphanCrow

• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  gnd: Fair use right?...

  No.

  You do not understand the legal concept of "fair use". You are using the moral or, emotional, concept of the word, not the legal one.
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Mephis: As far as it goes with the current 'debate' about COC in the real world, not really something I want to play with.

  I am paying attention.

  I have had to be familiar with how intellectual property laws work and I am very interested in the impact that the WWW has had on the interpretation and application of these laws.

  At one time, I was pretty active in the art industry - an active member of a photographer's gallery and a board member on that gallery for a couple years. We dealt with international artists sometimes. An understanding of copyright laws and intellectual property laws have been critical to much of my life and work as an artist. And it continues to be. I have read through the copyright act several times. And whenever I have had unanswered questions, I have spoke to people with legal experience. Copyright law and appropriation were also issues I would include in my classes - what each were and what the difference between the two were and to use each effectively, legally and ethically. Appropriation as a political act was something that discussed, theoretically and practically played out at times, as tools of the artist. The artist as "voice".

  So...yeah. I am paying attention to how this plays out. It matters to me personally. I have many friends who are writer and/or artists. And it is intellectually challenging. I like legal stuff.

  :)
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Mephis, your proposal addresses both issues - that of harm as well as when "copyright" transforms into "evidence".

  The copying and distribution of so-called copyright material becomes moot when it is used as evidence in exposing the harm already done by those copyrighted words.

  It is political positioning. In fact, that same copyright establishes that the words of the evidence is "fact". Their true words. So, copyright protection is there not just for the one who holds copyright - it protects the public, too. By establishing that what was said is real/true.
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  GND, I am saying that it highly questionable as to whether it meets the legal standard under intellectual property law to be considered for protection under "creative license". I don't think it does.

  If there are any "laws" that have been broken in the leaking of secret WTS material, the place to place legal culpability would be on the one(s) who leaked the material. They are the ones who are in danger of being prosecuted or internally disiplined. Like, for example, if it was a lawyer who had breached confidentiality of his client. Not the ones who picked up WTS material (evidence) in public space and spread it around.

  If the WTS wants to prosecute for the distribution of their "protected" material, it would be best if they looked inside rather that out here in the public spaces. And, they need to be aware that their "protection" and wall of internal security does not sit outside of the common law of the land. Australia proved that to us.
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  gnd: Copyright is utilized in any way the copyright holder wishes.

  No. You have to establish copyright first. I am saying that their material doesn't meet the standard of what can be copyrighted.

  Some things do not have any protection, or very little under intellectual property law. Just because you generated or made something doesn't mean that you can put it out there in public space and ask for protection under any of the intellectual property laws.

  Copyright protection is only one part of intellectual property law and The WTS material does not meet the standard to be considered as qualifying for such protection.
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  GND: Then tell me Orphan Cow, why is Watchtower successful in shutting down websites, youtubes, etc. of their choosing due to copyright violations?

  Maybe because nobody has taken them on yet with the right arguments. They have a lot of squawky lawyers and paper mountains at their disposal. And money.

  And also because much of copyright laws and intellectual property rights have been challenged at a rapid pace right along with the speed of the technological advances during the past couple decades. The legal world is trying to catch up.

  *Oh...and that is "Crow", by the way. You must have me mixed up with someone else. Sokay...that happens. :)
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  And...as far as "harm" goes...well, geez, I guess ya shouldn't have put it in print in the first place, huh?
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Damn. No. I do not believe that the WTS has protection under the copyright laws.

  Their publications don't stand the sniff test.

  Firstly, their indoctrination propaganda is "freely" distributed to the public.

  Secondly, so are the elder's manuals and letters, etc. A select group of "the public", but the public, nonetheless.

  Thirdly, an underlying principle that is part of the establishment of the copyright laws is such that the protection of ownership of "creative material" would stimulate more creative projects/endeavours. That is one of the primary purposes of copyright.

  Fourthly, the publication of "fact" is not creative.

  Fifthly, the ARC was not blocked from publishing the material to the public.

  The WTS material doesn't meet the standard on any of what copyright law requires or is intended to protect.

  The WTS is trying to set their own rules and call it "copyright law protection" when in reality, they are dealing with security breaches within their own organization. That's all. That kind of information - secret corportae stuff - is supposed to be kept secure if they don't want people to get their hands on it. That is why it is "secret". They can't legally protect it any other way.
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  I still think of it as a security breach rather than a copyright violation. I would argue that if I ever faced a judge on the matter.

  The "secret" WTS material is a publication of "facts", and I am not convinced that a "creative license" applies to it.
• 
  125

  Watchtower purchases CoC copyright for undisclosed amount!

  by the girl next door in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  now what is your stance?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Simon: It would still be breaking copyright law to pirate copies of the WTS secret elders manual..

  Again...I question if it is illegal to "pirate" the elders' manual.

  Is not the elders' manual readily available for public download on the ARC site? And no restrictions on its distribution?

  And many other WTS documents and publications as well? Ones that the WTS try to hold hostage and secret under their "copyright" rights?

  I don't think that redistributing WTS published material is "pirating". Not at all.