[sword-devel] John Gill

Pergamum sword-devel@crosswire.org
Mon, 3 Jul 2000 15:51:02 -0500

I don't think anyone's disputing his right to sell anything. What I think
the issue is more along the lines of is the simple fact that he claims
copyright on a non-copyrightable piece of work. If I type up something that
is public domain (greedy capitalist that I am) I feel more than justified to
ask for compensation for the labor and materials I put into the project (if
indeed I didn't volunteer my services in the first place); but I don't think
I'd have the unmitigated temerity to claim "copyright status" on a work that
is NOT my intellectual property. As for Zondervan, Nelson, and the rest of
the jabronies in the "Christian" publishing arena? Well hoss, I've always
held the same contention on them as our current case. I fully understand
charging money to recoup the cost for labor, materials, overhead and even a
profit. What I cannot understand however is their audacity to claim a
copyright on a work that was written by GOD through his prophets and
disciples. When Zondervan can show me an original papyrus  or stone tablet
contract between GOD, Moses, Mark, Peter, John, Daniel, Isaiah, etc. for
exclusive literary property rights to the Word of GOD, which we are told by
GOD HIMSELF to go out and preach to the world. We are not told to preach
"...up to and including 500 (or 1000) verses so long as it is less than one
complete book of the bible." Therefore Zondervan and Nelson's (oh, and
Lockwood's) copyright claims are in the least immoral. From my understanding
of copyright law in the US though, in order to claim ownership or copyright
something pre-existing the overall content must be changed at LEAST 10% (for
that's how rap artists get away with stealing samples from other songs.). To
this end I say that either the copyright claims of the Zond., Lock, Nelson
people are either invalid, or if it is changed that much, then it is NO
LONGER the authentic, inspired Word of GOD. But I have yet to see 10% of
substantial change in the NIV, NKJ, NASB, etc. that would make the works
non-Inspired. So I challenge their right to claim ownership of the
Scriptural text from Gen-Rev. (But I'm going to shut up now because I've
already babbled this out months ago. I just want to focus on the purpose at
hand: our part in the Great Commission.)

Thank you and God Bless,
In Christ Jesus,

----- Original Message -----
From: Jeffrey Hoyt <jeff@jhoyt.faithweb.com>
To: <sword-devel@crosswire.org>
Sent: Monday, 03 July, 2000 10:29
Subject: RE: [sword-devel] John Gill

> Hi all,
> We need to understand that in a free market economy, such as the United
> States, the forces of market economics must be allowed to work.  I think
> people are accusing Bob, et.al. of "pulling a Microsoft" on the
> Bible-studying world.  If someone doesn't like the fact that Bob sells
> Finn for $20, look elsewhere.  If Bob really wants your business, maybe he
> will lower his price.  However, as long as there are people willing to pay
> his price, he has no incentive to reduce it.  That's how the economy
> Dirt-poor tightwads like me :-) are in no way hindered from getting a copy
> that is monetarily free.
> I DO take exception with something I heard on the list unrelated
> to Bob - why is the world does Zondervan want $15,000 UP FRONT just to
> distribute the NIV, and pay royalties on top of that?  If anyone can
> that, I would appreciate it.  To me in my ignorance, that seems more
> monopolistic than anything.  Same with Lockman and NASB, etc.
> God bless, and let's turn those autoflaming off!  :-)
> Jeff Hoyt
> --
> | http://jhoyt.faithweb.com |
>     Don't be conservative.
>        Don't be liberal.
>            Be RIGHT.