DiscussMormonism.com

Does anyone know if most everything is in the possession of Intellectual Reserve or does the Corporation of the President still exist and hold any?

I read some things about the Intellectual Reserve's lawsuit against UTLM's for printing the CHI in the late 90's and wondered if everything is held by them.

Does the Church still hold a copyright to the Book of Mormon? I was under the impression that Joseph and his heirs or assigns could only hold the copyright for the original work for 70 years after his death.

Any information would be appreciated.

I wish someone knew something about this that could be shared.

MormonMendacity wrote:Does anyone know if most everything is in the possession of Intellectual Reserve or does the Corporation of the President still exist and hold any?

I read some things about the Intellectual Reserve's lawsuit against UTLM's for printing the CHI in the late 90's and wondered if everything is held by them.

Does the Church still hold a copyright to the Book of Mormon? I was under the impression that Joseph and his heirs or assigns could only hold the copyright for the original work for 70 years after his death.

Any information would be appreciated.

I am not sure what copyrights the Church holds, but, of course, I'm well aware of the CHI lawsuit, which threatened to change the entire Internet. (I.e., the Church wanted to be able to sue people for merely linking to places where the CHI was posted, which raises the question: What is the Church trying to hide?)

I think the bottomline is that the Church utilizes copyright law only when it feels like it. I doubt Church leaders are all that concerned with maintaining strict proprietary control over the Book of Mormon. They seem to be far more interested in focusing their efforts on more controversial texts, such as the CHI.

Mister Scratch wrote:

MormonMendacity wrote:Does anyone know if most everything is in the possession of Intellectual Reserve or does the Corporation of the President still exist and hold any?

I read some things about the Intellectual Reserve's lawsuit against UTLM's for printing the CHI in the late 90's and wondered if everything is held by them.

Does the Church still hold a copyright to the Book of Mormon? I was under the impression that Joseph and his heirs or assigns could only hold the copyright for the original work for 70 years after his death.

Any information would be appreciated.

I am not sure what copyrights the Church holds, but, of course, I'm well aware of the CHI lawsuit, which threatened to change the entire Internet. (I.e., the Church wanted to be able to sue people for merely linking to places where the CHI was posted, which raises the question: What is the Church trying to hide?)

I think the bottomline is that the Church utilizes copyright law only when it feels like it. I doubt Church leaders are all that concerned with maintaining strict proprietary control over the Book of Mormon. They seem to be far more interested in focusing their efforts on more controversial texts, such as the CHI.

Your supposition is wrong. The Church jealously guards all of its copyrighted material because failing to do so would constitute a waiver, and there is no telling what may occur if it waives its copyrights. As a matter of policy it protects them all. That should not be viewed as malice; it is just good sense to protect its written word from alteration -- the 116 page manuscript issue in the 21st century.

It has a copyright on the most recent version of the Book of Mormon, but prior copyrights on earlier versions expired. That is why Grant Hardy's recent wonderful work on the Book of Mormon reader is based upon the earlier iteration of the Book of Mormon.

Your mocking and derogatory tone about the Church trying to "hide" something is superciliousness. How can the Church "hide" what is disseminated to thousands? If you don't chase copyright violators today, you won't be able to do so tomorrow.

P

Plutarch wrote:Your supposition is wrong. The Church jealously guards all of its copyrighted material because failing to do so would constitute a waiver, and there is no telling what may occur if it waives its copyrights. As a matter of policy it protects them all. That should not be viewed as malice; it is just good sense to protect its written word from alteration -- the 116 page manuscript issue in the 21st century.

It has a copyright on the most recent version of the Book of Mormon, but prior copyrights on earlier versions expired. That is why Grant Hardy's recent wonderful work on the Book of Mormon reader is based upon the earlier iteration of the Book of Mormon.

Your mocking and derogatory tone about the Church trying to "hide" something is superciliousness. How can the Church "hide" what is disseminated to thousands? If you don't chase copyright violators today, you won't be able to do so tomorrow.

P

Yep, you're correct about the church's copyright on the Book of Mormon. The text of the Book of Mormon has long since passed into the public domain, but the church's latest edition, meaning the sum of the text, the formatting, and the study materials such as the footnotes and index constitute the church's copyrighted material.

As for the 116 page thing, I don't see the church as panicking because it is unable to reproduce a divinely inspired manuscript, but that's just me.

Plutarch wrote:As a matter of policy it protects them all.

Thanks, Plutarch. Can you send me a copy of the policy or is that copyrighted?

MormonMendacity wrote:

Plutarch wrote:As a matter of policy it protects them all.

Thanks, Plutarch. Can you send me a copy of the policy or is that copyrighted?

No. Twit.

Plutarch wrote:

Mister Scratch wrote:

MormonMendacity wrote:Does anyone know if most everything is in the possession of Intellectual Reserve or does the Corporation of the President still exist and hold any?

I read some things about the Intellectual Reserve's lawsuit against UTLM's for printing the CHI in the late 90's and wondered if everything is held by them.

Does the Church still hold a copyright to the Book of Mormon? I was under the impression that Joseph and his heirs or assigns could only hold the copyright for the original work for 70 years after his death.

Any information would be appreciated.

I am not sure what copyrights the Church holds, but, of course, I'm well aware of the CHI lawsuit, which threatened to change the entire Internet. (I.e., the Church wanted to be able to sue people for merely linking to places where the CHI was posted, which raises the question: What is the Church trying to hide?)

I think the bottomline is that the Church utilizes copyright law only when it feels like it. I doubt Church leaders are all that concerned with maintaining strict proprietary control over the Book of Mormon. They seem to be far more interested in focusing their efforts on more controversial texts, such as the CHI.

Your supposition is wrong. The Church jealously guards all of its copyrighted material because failing to do so would constitute a waiver, and there is no telling what may occur if it waives its copyrights. As a matter of policy it protects them all. That should not be viewed as malice; it is just good sense to protect its written word from alteration -- the 116 page manuscript issue in the 21st century.

I disagree, and think your assessment of the Chuch's motives is rather silly. The Church has no issue whatsoever with its faith-promoting materials being disseminated, passed around, xeroxed, copied, etc. On the other hand, the Church goes ballistic over, say, the Tanners reproducing a small section from the CHI. The guarding of copyrighted material is clearly a function of the Church's desire to control everything.

It has a copyright on the most recent version of the Book of Mormon, but prior copyrights on earlier versions expired. That is why Grant Hardy's recent wonderful work on the Book of Mormon reader is based upon the earlier iteration of the Book of Mormon.

Your mocking and derogatory tone about the Church trying to "hide" something is superciliousness. How can the Church "hide" what is disseminated to thousands? If you don't chase copyright violators today, you won't be able to do so tomorrow.
P

And what would be the point? Why should the Church waste thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours tracking down these evil "violators"? What's the big deal? Why get so bend out of shape over free access to the CHI? Unless, of course, the Church has something to hide.

Mister Scratch wrote:I disagree, and think your assessment of the Chuch's motives is rather silly. The Church has no issue whatsoever with its faith-promoting materials being disseminated, passed around, xeroxed, copied, etc. On the other hand, the Church goes ballistic over, say, the Tanners reproducing a small section from the CHI. The guarding of copyrighted material is clearly a function of the Church's desire to control everything.

Mock mock mock.

"Desire to control everything." Just its intellectual property, like any institution.

And what would be the point? Why should the Church waste thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours tracking down these evil "violators"? What's the big deal? Why get so bend out of shape over free access to the CHI? Unless, of course, the Church has something to hide.

I assume that you believe that everybody on this board is unable to obtain free access to the CHI with a little effort.

Now, you won't find Larry McMurtry's "Lonesome Dove" posted anywhere on the internet, will you? Why not? Do you think that his publisher has "something to hide?" Do you think that his publisher zealously pursues copyright violations?

Why don't you post your questions to folks who read and publish literature, and ask them how the feel about the wholesale piracy of published literature? Or, do you have such friends; friends who read?

P

Plutarch wrote:

Mister Scratch wrote:I disagree, and think your assessment of the Chuch's motives is rather silly. The Church has no issue whatsoever with its faith-promoting materials being disseminated, passed around, xeroxed, copied, etc. On the other hand, the Church goes ballistic over, say, the Tanners reproducing a small section from the CHI. The guarding of copyrighted material is clearly a function of the Church's desire to control everything.

Mock mock mock.

"Desire to control everything." Just its intellectual property, like any institution.

Who's mocking? I was just making an observation, P. And I hardly think that the LDS Church is "like any institution." Employee manuals and guidebooks are frequently published online anyhow. Why should the Church stir up such a stink over the CHI?

And what would be the point? Why should the Church waste thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours tracking down these evil "violators"? What's the big deal? Why get so bend out of shape over free access to the CHI? Unless, of course, the Church has something to hide.

I assume that you believe that everybody on this board is unable to obtain free access to the CHI with a little effort.

Well, it involves circumventing the desires of the Church. Moreover, one cannot access it via Explorer.

Now, you won't find Larry McMurtry's "Lonesome Dove" posted anywhere on the internet, will you?

Why not?

Because it is a copyrighted work of literature.

Do you think that his publisher has "something to hide?"

No.

Do you think that his publisher zealously pursues copyright violations?

I don't know about "zealously". If there was some flagrant violation of copyright out there, then I imagine McMurtry's publisher would do something about it. Instigating legislation that threatens to change the entire was the Internet works is something else. Something "zealous," actually.

Why don't you post your questions to folks who read and publish literature, and ask them how the feel about the wholesale piracy of published literature? Or, do you have such friends; friends who read?
P

There's no need. "Folks who publish literature" earn their livelihood from doing that. The LDS Church, on the other hand, pulls in income from a variety of other avenues. Finally, I do not think that the CHI qualifies even remotely as "literature," in either a colloquial or conventional sense. One could argue that the Book of Mormon is "literature," in a sense, but dissemination of the Book of Mormon is not regarded as problematic from the Church's POV.