DiscussMormonism.com

Did anyone catch CNN last night?

When they reported on the hearings for the FLDS, the attorney for the group claimed the government is trying to take away the Book of Mormon and the doctrine in it.

First, of course the doctrine is not in the Book of Mormon but in the D&C, nevertheless, it was startling to hear, given how hard the LDS church is trying to distance themselves from any relationship to the FLDS.

I do think it won't be long before the news finds out that the LDS does indeed have polygamy right in their scriptures, or that some men in the LDS church are indeed actually spiritually married to multiple women, or that the LDS church does indeed BELIEVE in polygamy.



~dancer~

I wonder if anybody knows that the LDS Church holds a trademark on the term "Book of Mormon"?

Sethbag wrote:I wonder if anybody knows that the LDS Church holds a trademark on the term "Book of Mormon"?

They might hold one, but it wouldn't be valid. They probably only use it to bully individuals.

Sethbag wrote:I wonder if anybody knows that the LDS Church holds a trademark on the term "Book of Mormon"?

How is this possible? If they held a trademark on the Book of Mormon then how is it that the RLDS church is able to print their own copies? Did you know that the RLDS Book of Mormon is different than the LDS? This is something to look into.

Filed for in 2002. Registration published in 2004. Owned by the Church's IP subsidiary, Intellectual Reserve, Inc.

The TM covers audio and video recordings (class 09) and books and other literature (class 016).

See the US Trademark Office http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=ceh7s3.3.20

Also see a search on the trademark office's site for "Mormon" for other fun Mormon trademarks such as "Mormon Football League". (EDITED TO REMOVE LENGTHY LINK - the TM Office's basic search function can be found at: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=t ... 2kjtab.1.1)

Note that having a registered trademark does not mean that no one else can use the term, just that they cannot use it in a commercially confusing sense for the registered goods. Otherwise I could not type the following: Tide, BMW, Google, Lighthouse Ministries, Peanuts, Apple, Delta (airlines), Delta (faucets), Delta (Burke, from Designing Women).

truth dancer wrote:Did anyone catch CNN last night?

When they reported on the hearings for the FLDS, the attorney for the group claimed the government is trying to take away the Book of Mormon and the doctrine in it.

First, of course the doctrine is not in the Book of Mormon but in the D&C, nevertheless, it was startling to hear, given how hard the LDS church is trying to distance themselves from any relationship to the FLDS.

I do think it won't be long before the news finds out that the LDS does indeed have polygamy right in their scriptures, or that some men in the LDS church are indeed actually spiritually married to multiple women, or that the LDS church does indeed BELIEVE in polygamy.



~dancer~

I didn't see the CNN piece, but I heard that there was some hubbub about the state confiscating a boy's Book of Mormon because he taped a picture of Jeffs in it. I understand that the Book of Mormon was returned (though not sure about the picture). I don't think there was anything about "taking away doctrine", like that is even possible.

I suppose its possible, like some family bibles, FLDS record family information births deaths etc.. and the police are trying to figure out marital relations.

Of course if the FLDS followed the Book of Mormon they would not be practicing plural marriages ..

The Church does not hold a copyright on "The Book of Mormon". It expired long ago.

The Church holds a copyright on the 1981 version of the Book of Mormon, with its commentary and footnotes and changes.

Grant Hardy recently published a very good Reader's Edition of the Book of Mormon. He didn't need the Church's permission to do so; he used the 1921 text.

My understanding, which could be incorrect, is that the reason that copies of the Book of Mormon were taken away from two children in state custody is that they had a picture of Warren Jeffs (who is a convicted sex offender) on or in the cover. It was simply that, as I understand it. That's how it was reported on the cable TV news program I was watching.

It might be that the FLDS adults and attorneys are responding that it's an infringement over freedom of religion, but my understanding was that the objection was the Warren Jeffs worship/influence, that simple.

Buckeye (or one of the mods), could you please edit your link so that it doesn't...
... extend past the normal width of the page?
It causes all of the posts on this page to become extremely...
...wide, making any would-be reader engage in intolerable horizontal scrolling.

Thank you.