45 replies to this topic

[Bradley S. Cobb]

Romans 13:1-ff says we are to obey the laws of the land. So long as it doesn't violate the law of Christ (we ought to obey God rather than man), then we are to follow it...regardless of how utterly stupid we may think it is.

As I understand the copyright laws, owning a physical copy grants you the permission to make copies of it for your own personal use. If you buy a CD, legally you can copy it to your computer, then take the newly-made mp3's and put them in your mp3 player. Now you have three copies of the same songs, but it is all legal. If you buy a book, you can scan it and make a digital version for personal use, and it is completely legal because you own the book.

The problem arises when you make that available to anyone and everyone, regardless of whether they have a hard copy (or a purchased electronic copy) or not.

If you are worried that something you have may not be "kosher," look at your bookshelf. If you own a hardcopy of it, then legally, you have the right to possess it in a converted format. If you don't, then I suggest you remedy that.

This coming from my 8 years in the record industry.

Brad

[jonathon]

I'm a little surprised that Jonathon did not included this in his post,

What I was indirectly saying was that even though the work is entitled Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament I have grave doubts about it being a true and faithful representation of the work by Gleason, Archer, and Archer.

At best, it is akin to the Nave's Topical Bible for e-Sword. A number of entries from that work, but it is a not a true and faithful representation of any specific edition of Nave's.
jonathon

[jonathon]

They unfortunately can not be deleted forever, and are being used. To avoid any legal problems in the U.S. at least you can purchase a hard copy of the resource and this will give you license for a personal electronic version if my understanding is correct.

Copyright is about distribution, not possession.

I am not sure what the right way to ask a publisher to use a resource that is already in existence for use or distribution.

I'd suggest leaving it up to Rick and Phil.

The wrong way to do things, is for users to send requests to either the publisher, or the copyright owner.

they really need to know that these modules exsist. I think it would be great to have a list of them somewhere but I could not tell you the number of hours it would take to research the thousands of modules that have been made and shared for all the copyright information.

One of the reasons I started The e-Sword Module Database, was to get an idea of what was out there. One very unexpected issue I ran into, was having to talk with lawyers about the contents of that document.

By the time I stopped updating the database, I had decided that unless a resource included specific information demonstrating that permission to distribute had been obtained from the legitimate copyright owner, it was being distributed in violation of copyright law. A position that was very unpopular in some quarters, and of quasi-dubious legal grounds, but made for very simple, and fast determination of whether or not a resource was being distributed legally.

Case in point: Ministers, unless their contract with their congregation specifically states otherwise, do not own the copyright to the sermons they preach. Furthermore, they do not have the legal right to grant permission for their sermons, or any other content they create for their congregation, to be distributed in any format.

jonathon

[Vaughn]

Brad, Jonathon and Stephen,

This is a subject that has so much controversy around it. I know that Jonathon has worked for years at trying to reign it in, however, that attempt has caused many a problem for him. I have never and will never contact a publisher about getting a module made. I have been contacted by one publisher when he discovered my spreadsheet and I provided them with the details of the module and I do not share it anymore.
Most of the "non-kosher" modules that I have I got long before ESU, and Biblesupport existed. I have continued to purchase hard copies of them as my financial status allows but this is hundreds of thousands of dollars we are talking about, so it is going kind of slow. Nonetheless I have them and do not share them.
Now, as for module conversion from one program to another, this is a place where I am not really sure what the right answer is. What I am looking to do is convert The Word modules to e-Sword format. However, the modules that I would like to see converted are the ones that David Cox is making. I believe he should get all the credit. I also believe that he is only making stuff that is from the public domain and therefore is available to be converted with no problems or copyright infringements. I guess it really comes down to your own ethics and morals and in the end how you will answer to the Lord for what you do. Just my humble thoughts.

[Bradley S. Cobb]

The wrong way to do things, is for users to send requests to either the publisher, or the copyright owner.

No offense, Jonathon, but that means that all the module builders who request permission to make (or make public) a non-public domain module are in the wrong, unless you have a more specific meaning for the above statement.

Case in point: Ministers, unless their contract with their congregation specifically states otherwise, do not own the copyright to the sermons they preach. Furthermore, they do not have the legal right to grant permission for their sermons, or any other content they create for their congregation, to be distributed in any format.

This quote is not accurate. Unless spelled out in a contract with the church as otherwise, the writings of a preacher are his intellectual property. The congregation may have the right to republish any articles or sermons which appear in "official" church publications (the congregation bulletin or website, for example). But that does not give them the copyright ownership to the content. Meaning, if the minister moves to another congregation, they cannot sue him over putting one of his own old articles in the new bulletin. They do not have that right unless a signed contract specifically states it. Unless spelled out otherwise in a contract, the preacher is required to verbally speak a lesson. IF ANYTHING, the congregation owns the copyright to the recording, not the content of the lesson.

Having said that--the fact that such an issue is even being discussed is proof that some people are not acting in a way that Christ would want. After all, we're all preaching and teaching stuff taken from Him!

Brad, who is happily working with a congregation free of any contracts at all. A handshake and trust in brethren is good enough for me.

Edited by Cobb78, 02 March 2012 - 10:15 PM.

[jonathon]

but that means that all the module builders who request permission to make (or make public) a non-public domain module are in the wrong, unless you have a more specific meaning for the above statement.

I'm talking about users, not module builders.
Even with module builders, it can work against the "greater good" of e-Sword resource development.

This quote is not accurate. Unless spelled out in a contract with the church as otherwise, the writings of a preacher are his intellectual property.

The sermons are part of the job description, and as such they constitute "work for hire".

The only reason the case law is not as clear cut for clergy, as it is for other jobs, is due to the first amendment. (Courts initially saw the copyright dispute as a purely theological issue, and as such they are outside the purview of the justice system.)

the congregation owns the copyright to the recording,

That would be the ℗rights. An addition to the © rights.

Having said that--the fact that such an issue is even being discussed is proof that some people are not acting in a way that Christ would want. After all, we're all preaching and teaching stuff taken from Him!

In most disputes, the driving issue is who gets the royalty payments. Given the hard times that most churches have fallen into, that revenue source starts to look like a gold mine, even though it more likely turns out to be akin to Ponce de León's Fountain of Youth.

jonathon

[Josh Bond]

Actually, I think Jonathon's right. The legal term is "work product". If you hire a contract technical writer to write documentation for you, by default (unless a contract states otherwise), the hiring entity owns the work product--the documentation. If you hire an employee technical writer, the law automatically assumes the work product belongs to the employer (all intellectual property, inventions, etc. the employee conceives or creates also belongs to the employer).

That would seemingly apply to pastors as well. Many churches are ncorporated. Either way, they're an employer. The work product would probably belong to the hiring entity--the church-- unless otherwise stated. It's something every pastor should be aware of, in my humble opinion. It would probably never be an issue unless...you were the next "Joel Olsteen" selling a zillion books.

[Bradley S. Cobb]

According to the IRS, I am an independent contractor. My responsibilities, as given in the spoken agreement with the congregation is to preach (verbally) two lessons a week, as well as teach (verbally) one class each week. I could conceivably use someone else's material for every sermon and class (I don't, but I could). Does that mean that the congregation now owns the rights to someone else's work since I used it there? Of course not.

The problem with who owns the copyrights to sermons, etc... all comes down to churches not being satisfied with the God-given mandate that the financial support of the church and its projects comes from free-will offerings (I Cor 16:1-2, II Cor 8-9). When you start deciding God's instructions aren't enough and need to be supplemented, then you run into problems.

Edited by Squeaky, 11 March 2012 - 05:50 PM.

[Josh Bond]

I could conceivably use someone else's material for every sermon and class (I don't, but I could). Does that mean that the congregation now owns the rights to someone else's work since I used it there? Of course not.

Plagiarism from the pulpit is a whole another can of worms. There's plenty of legal information on the internet indicating pastors do not own their sermons. You can google if it interests you. I won't beat a dead horse here, but I find it interesting as a legal geek (and it's probably off topic here). It's unlikely the legal ownership of sermons would ever impact 99% or more of pastors. Getting caught plagiarizing would be a far more likely scenario, since Google can reveal amazing things about just a snippet of text or speech that's not even an exact quote.

[pfpeller]

Hi,

But, as said, any format will do.

BigPaw,
Someone may have already have stated this, but TWOT is available for theWord Bible software. I had that other version of TWOT people are talking about. I just purchased the official version from theWord and what a blessing. It is keyed to Strongs numbers. When you click on a strongs number in theWord and then open TWOT, you are where you need to be with no extra steps. It is very efficient to use in theWord.

If you are interested, you can purchase it here: http://www.theword.n...title&l=english
For an excellent review of theWord version of TWOT you can go to Dr. Dave's site here: http://www.doctordav...wot_review.html

Blessings,
Peter