[sword-devel] Is sword going non-gpl or proprietory?

Derek Neighbors sword-devel@crosswire.org
08 Sep 2002 21:56:14 -0700

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> What does surprise me is the "apparent" attitude of the bible societies=20
> towards this project.  At least from the (very) short time I have been=20
> following the issues surrounding this.  It seems that certain copyright=20
> modules are locked but more to the point that there is no way to purchase=
> keys for these locked modules??  That there is this great distrust betwee=
> the bible societies and sword.  To put it bluntly I am astonished that th=
> bible societies want to put a stumbling block towards the spreading of th=
> gospel.  Does anyone know how long active lobbying of the bible societies=
> been happening?  And why it seems that so few of them have been willing t=
> alter thier positiion???

I find it absolutely ABHORRENT that they view their perceived loss of
revenues greater than following the great commission.  However, I
suppose most of the publishers are not run by people actual centering
themselves on Christ.

I think what is amazing is that American copyright system allows them to
obtain copyright on material that is based upon work that they do NOT
even own.  Can you imagine how ape say a musician (bono) or a cartoon
company (disney) would go if their original works were allowed to be
interpreted and released under new copyright?  Oh yeah thats right they
just would change the law to extend copyright so we wouldnt have a
chance to see what they would do. ;)

I still would like to know more about the law in this area.  Whereby
they are taking a work (original texts) that are CLEARLY in the public
domain and translating them.

I could see if they were claiming they were modifying in some way that
was 'artful' or changing the content, but my understanding would be if
they were changing the meaning, then in effect who would want to read
their version....=20

Derek Neighbors
GNU Enterprise

Was I helpful?  Let others know:

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)