Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

By this i mean all texts must be outside of any Copyright Controls, and therefore free to copy and use by anybody.

Any thoughts?

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

There's plenty of room for academic writings on religious topics. A modern-day C.S. Lewis shouldn't be required to forfeit revenue from his writings. That said, any 'official' texts used by any 'official' tax-exempt religions should be public domain. No organization or institution should have exclusive rights to own, access, or distribute those texts.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Yes.

The texts that acts as dogmas, guidelines to be followed, core parts, instructions, godly words and so on and so forth should be.

Opinions and interpretations should not.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Anything classified as "religious scripture" should exist free of copyright controls or licensing. Clearly, any work restricted by copyright directs value primarily to a private party.
Also, no "religious trademarks" should be allowed. There term itself is an oxymoron.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Seems fair to connect tax deduction with public domain.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Sadly, there are no opinions or interpretations of Tech within the body of the Scientology Church.
Materials are either Source, or liability/treason/doubt.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

It coudl easily be argued that the hideous expense of Scientology caused via RTC's licensing fees is a violation of the first amendment, since it prohibits the free exercise of Scientology. The Free Zoners believe $ci should be free, and since Scientology IS a religion, it means that the Free Zoners have a religious right to use and disseminate Scientology books.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

I’ve argued this many times on this board. I’ve yet to see a convincing counter-argument. The closest is translations being copyrightable, but that doesn’t apply here.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

One of your best posts, I think. Most of them are short, but this one's unusually pithy.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

yep

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

yes

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Lurk interesting.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Ethically? Yes. By law? No.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

I don't agree. If a Freezoner publishes a copy of Dianetics and gives it to someone, can RTC claim that only RTC could? It's impossible to have religious freedom if one entity has a monopoly on that religion. Copyrights are meant to protect intellectual property by establishing a monopoly for that good or service.

Seriously, if the FreeZone wants to wreck the church of Miscavige, let them publish a book using copyrighted materials then fight it out in court. They won't do this, but if they did I'd bet they'd more than likely win.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

You may want to look up what happened to David Mayo before making such a bold statement such as this...

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

On the one hand, courts have become somewhat more aware of the shenanigans CoS plays (the saga of David Mayo helped with that) and if arguing within 1985 statutes, the FZ would likely be able to make a much stronger case today.

On the other, copyright law has become far more intricate and leans much more heavily towards the rights of the copyright-holders than before. The courts have largely upheld these extensions and rights-abridgments of third parties without much dissent.

If Mayo/FreeZone were to prevail TODAY, it would have far-reaching impact, well beyond the mere dispute between two failing 'new religious movements', but are the courts that brave?

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Can anyone think of any religious texts aside from those of Scientology and Pastafarianism that are copywritten?

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

I like this idea, religious texts should not be copyrightable, though I can see practical problems for it. What is a religious text? The law seems to have enough trouble defining a religion.

I reckon no matter what definition was used the scilons would find a way around it by setting up some 3rd party to generate "educational materials", as has already been pointed out there are a lot of books about religions that should remain copyrightable - then again discouraging the whole industry might not be a bad idea...

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

I can think of the Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Urantia Foundation, Raelians and the Moonies which have copyrighted religious texts.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

I think the author claiming it to be religious would suffice.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

This is a freedom of religion argument. Should a religion be absolutely free to define what it considers to be religious? Does removing the right of a religious body or religion institution to secure their works and restrict who can profit from them encroach too far upon religious freedom?

I think this is dangerous territory for a government to be in. I personally think that only public health and public safety should be the only cases in which religious freedom should be encroached.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

+ Church of the SubGenius
their copyrighted texts are reproduced at random throughout the internets, including (but not limited to) their own website. The "catch" is: reading their scriptures online (or borrowed from the Library, or your slacker friend) will by themselves provide NO SPIRITUAL BENEFIT because

Click here to avoid legal, ethical, social, moral, grammatical, magickal and environmental errors.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

This is why a government should have no role in enforcing religious copyrights. By granting copyright on any religious text this is what the judicial system is asked to do.

Also, if you read the first amendment you might notice that ‘religion’ is used in the sense of ‘beliefs’. So arguing about ‘religions’, in the sense of ‘groups’, in this context is a mistake.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

So, "freedom to file frivolous lawsuits intended to 'destroy' their critics" should be protected, so long as their legal tactics don't erode their targets' safety.

And, Snow White style ops; so long as there are adequate "public health and public safety" safeguards in place.

Basically, what you're saying amounts to "religious freedom should be more strongly protected than other freedoms"- if in cases where "religious freedom" and other commonly recognized freedoms conflict, "public health and public safety" are the only grounds for encroaching against "religious freedom".

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

That's not what I meant. I mean if it is a religious belief that the works of that particular religion should be kept secret and/or restricted to a certain availability or should not be profited from by an unauthorized 3rd party you would suggest that there should be a separate method to do this for religious texts than by copyright? I don't see why an author of a religious work should be treated less fairly than an author of a secular work.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Everyone has the right to file frivolous lawsuits.

Obviously I'm not advocating that religions be able to supplant existing criminal law. We're talking about law that deals specifically and solely to religion in general, or any given specific religion, and no other sector.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Unless you are arguing that the government should be legislating upon religious beliefs then you point is moot. This is precisely what you argument regarding copyrights amounts to.

What you are doing is tantamount to arguing that the rights of one religious group are superior to the rights of other religious groups. The FreeZone, for example, are second class within your concept of religious ‘freedom’.

There should be NO restrictions on a person’s ability to access any religious text of their choosing. When you are argue for copyright you are, in effect, asking the government to interfere in who can and cannot hold the religion of their own choosing. Good luck with that.

If they claim their work is religious then I have no problem whatsoever with this. The alternative to argue for government entanglement in religious belief. I know you are trying to skirt around that conclusion, but it really is the upshot of what you are advocating.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Your argument doesn't make sense.

You are saying that if a religion were to voluntarily ask the government to protect their own works just like any other published work or intellectual property that this would mean the government would be encroaching upon religious freedom in anyway?

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Sorry, I missed that bit.
Yes, its VERY DANGEROUS TERRITORY FOR A GOVERNMENT TO BE IN. However, navigating through the shoals and open water of "dangerous territories" is their job.

Vexatious litigants don't. Trouble is, that we don't have good legal apparatus in place for dealing with organizations which SLAPP with such fury ; so you have cases like GB's contrasted with KM's. My particular concern was that 'religious organizations' should have neither special protections, nor special discriminations that don't apply to other groups. But it should be possible for a 'religious organization' (or any other organization) to be identified as a vexatious litigant, and for some of their default protected rights to be abridged or revoked.

If you specify the context where 'Religious Freedom' is being posited as a defense: against encroachments within the scope of "copyright law" e.g. you may have a valid point. It wasn't obvious to me that this limited scope was implied in your earlier remarks. If so, I sit corrected.

There are plenty of cases, however, where "religious freedom" can conflict with other personal and categorical freedoms, and these need to be examined case-by-case within their respective domains, IMO. Goes back to "it's the job of governments to be in dangerous territory, whether we like it (or they like it) or not."

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Then let me be more clear. I don't see that the government has any business writing laws that specifically give rights to religions that other entities do not have, or that the government has any business writing laws that specifically deny religions rights that other entities have except in the case of public safety or public health.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

It is quite simple. The judicial branch of the government enforces copyrights. You are therefore, by arguing for religious copyrights, asking the government to raise the religious freedoms of one group (the copyright holder) to the expense of others’ religious freedom. In other words, the upshot is that you are asking the government to restrict religious freedoms.

The FreeZone are a good example. By arguing for religious copyrights you are, in consequence, arguing for the restriction of the FreeZone’s religious freedoms.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Intersting spin on this thought experiment... if it is to be tax exempt, it must be publically transparent. Smells like a legal extension of making charters for non_profits public.

The libertarian side of me can't seem to find a problem with this either, which is a shocker.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Not at all. I'm saying the government should not grant or deny any freedoms specifically to religious institutions. You're essentially saying that court action involving two religions as litigants is going to restrict religious freedoms. While this may be true it is also true that denying a religion rights that are granted to others is restricting religious freedoms.

If you argue that the court should never hear any case between two religious entities you are really leaving open a huge hole for all sorts of vexatious religious conflicts to take place unchecked.

What if a religion was to claim that it is their religious imperative to vandalize another religion's property? What if a religion was to claim that they have a religious imperative to occupy facilities owned and operated by another religion?

The most simple solution is to not allow religions to be exempt from any law and not to specifically restrict the rights of religion in general, a specific religion or religions, or the followers of a religions or religions. IE they should have the same access to the courts as any other entity.

Yes this restricts religious freedoms, but no freedom is or has ever been intended to give license to any person or group to ride roughshod over the rights of others. You can't simply claim anything as a religious imperative and expect the government to not only bend over backwards to accommodate, but literally deny another party of property because of it.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

The King James Bible in the UK. (Strictly speaking, a perpetual Crown Letters Patent rather than a standard copyright.) Many of the first copyright laws involved Bible publication rights--it was a hot burning topic (literally, for books and publishers) back in the day.

With most religions, the source texts are older than Mickey Mouse and are therefore usually in the public domain. However, any derivative publication acquires its own copyright on stuff like translation, text layout, original artwork, etc. So you can print your own version of the Bible, but e.g. you can't print a copy of Bob Fundy's Fanatic Bible (2002) version without Bob Fundy's permission. There are frequent quiet little squabbles between church groups over derivative versions.

And then there's quite a muddle over stuff like the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Dead Sea Scrolls Protected by Copyright - ABC News

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

Hahaha, I know this would never happen but I'm enjoying entertaining the idea and thinking about its implications.

If secularism were a necessary prerequisite for copyright protection, well... that'd go a long way towards producing a secular society. That's something I'd love to see.

But I think secularism will win out without this law, and I can imagine situations where this law could violate civil rights. Still, though, copyright protects the author against unauthorized dissemination/distribution of their ideas. So removing copyright doesn't undermine freedom of speech at all - it just undermines the freedom of a non-governmental agency to legally restrict speech. It restricts the ability of a speaker to earn a profit from their speech. And in the case of religious institutions, I think that would be a marvelous.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

I wonder how well a modern revisit of the Thomas Jefferson Bible would go over. Delicious Pasta literally ripped out of the KJV:
(emphasizing "what JC actually said" but downplaying supernatural elements and stuff Jefferson considered TL;DR)





(LOL. even the "Christian Hackers" consider this a "bad hack"

Don't Cut Up Your Bible [bad.hack]

But legally- could you get away with a copypasta-style bible salvaged from multiple sources, with varying degrees of copyright encumberment? Freedom of expression (of biblical Pasta chefs) vs Freedom of Expression (of title holders of copywrited texts). No doubt the law would favor the latter- but is there some level of "creative value" that would be sufficient to allow a derivative work separate copyright title in its own right?

Re: nonreligious works, there's a ton of case law litigated that establishes fair and reasonable boundaries; I don't know that there's a whole lot that references religious texts specifically.

I do know that "religious speech" is even more protected than other forms- when various acts of religious speech conflict with eachother do we just ignore the word "religion" and fall back on precedent established for non-religious copyright issues?

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

It doesn’t work like this, and it is simply word gymnastics on your part. The FreeZone having religious freedom does not involve restricting the religious freedom of the CoS. They can still practice, worship, believe, etc. in the same manner they do today.

The problem you appear to be having is stemming from a misinterpretation on your part of what ‘freedom of religion’ means. It means having the right to hold/choose the religion of your choosing. You appear to be appending extra rights onto this concept.

Not what I’ve argued, and I refuse to believe that you really think this was what I’m advocating. Seems you went this route to use the two faulty analogies you later present.

Irony. By arguing for religious copyrights you are arguing for the right of certain groups to be able to ‘ride roughshod over the rights of others’.

The mistake you are making here is that you appear to believe it is I that is making claims over whether something is religious. I am not – it is the authors of the texts in question that are doing that.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

There is something of a ‘hoisting by their own petards’ about this.

Re: Q. Should all religious texts be in the Public Domain by Law?

yes, if they are tax exempt, it should be public domain, kinda like how, if you work for a company to do research, all your patents you make during your time their belong to them.

I say do it.