Posted on 06/18/2008 7:08:14 AM PDT by Zakeet
A scrappy Web site that's built a reputation for taking on Goliath-sized corporate and government corruption is now fighting a holy war over copyright infringement.
Wikileaks — a watchdog Web site that leaks corporate and government documents — hasn't officially launched, yet it has already uncovered human rights violations in China, claimed to have swayed Kenya's elections and exposed the inner workings of Guantanamo Bay.
So many were surprised when it recently turned its sights on two lawyer-heavy religious groups: the Mormons and the Scientologists.
Founded in December 2006, Wikileaks boasts of an archive of 1.2 million released documents, sent in by thousands of sources and posted so the public can help debunk, verify or publicize them.
The site is run by a scattered worldwide community of journalists, activists and Chinese dissidents and funded mainly by "people who have made a lot of money in the Internet boom," according to Wikileaks advisory board member and unofficial spokesman Julian Assange.
[Snip]
If it were to come to a legal battle in the U.S. with either the Scientologists or the Mormons, Columbia University intellectual-law professor Jane Ginsburg said, Wikileaks likely would claim strong protections under U.S. fair-use laws, which give leeway for whistle-blowing groups that use even copyrighted materials to back up their claims of corruption or abuse.
So far, neither religious group has taken its copyright complaint to the courts.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The group defends its motives, saying that exposing secret information empowers people, as in the case of the Mormon Church document.
"The document is not available to the public or to women in the Mormon church. In fact, a number of Mormon women wrote us describing how happy they were to see this information listed," [a Wikileaks spokesman] said.
What? No mention of Global Warming?
This LDS member sides with Wikileaks. I think it does fall under fair use. If they were selling copies then I would have a problem. As it stands though I find nothing patently offensive about them simply making the handbook available.
Commentary on the documents I think might cross the line however as was the case with their Scientology leaks. While they still aren’t selling the documents they crossed from being a third party objective outsider to being a subjective critic. In that case I don’t think the documents fall under fair use and Scientology can say the documents cannot be used any longer. Remove the comments and falls back to fair use imo.
That being said....wait till Wikileaks quotes more then 4 words from an AP article :).
We’ve weathered mobs of murderous fanatics who drove Mormon pioneers from their homes in the dead of night and murdered their prophet. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will likely weather a group of self-righteous, self-appointed, Internet nerds with delusions of grandeur. If you take a stand in this world, you’re going to have enemies. “The Son of Man hath passed beneath all of these things, art thou greater than he?”
Excellent. The more dirt the better.
Now our underwear is golden? It keeps getting better each time I hear the story. It never gets old because the story keeps changing.
The whole point of “fair use” is to promote research and education. Why on earth do you think posting commentary on the documents would take the posted outside of the “fiar use” umbrella?
Re the Handbook of Instructions, I’m not LDS but am quite familiar with the Church. I understand why they don’t want the Handbook in circulation, since it would tend to promote legalistic debates in settings such as a member meeting with a bishop, interfering with the inspiration/revelation-guided interaction that is supposed to be central to such meetings. However, the Church might as well get used to the idea that the Internet age has arrived, and give up the fight to keep the Handbook off the Internet. Any member who wants to read it is going to be able to, and most of the stuff in there would be of little interest to anyone outside the Church.
I have long pondered the uncanny similarities between the "beliefs" of both of these groups. Glad to hear they are being exposed to the daylight.
Since use in a parody has been commonly cited as an example of 'fair use', I find it strange that you think any other critical use is forbidden.
If the only 'fair use' allowed was a free re-print service, there's really no 'use' there at all, other than of promoting the author(s) sales.
This government document specifically calls out criticism as a valid 'fair use'.
107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ21.pdf
Lighten up, eh? Then why was your post removed? I didn’t go to the mods. Maybe you were overplaying it a bit?
Huh how bout that. I was unaware of the criticism clause. Thought it was just news, education, research, and backup. Well in that case guess I’m completely on Wikileaks side then even on the Scientology one.
Exposing Scientology, the LDS and ^not^ the Masons...hoodathunk it...
We have those here...
Wow, I am shocked...
Yes indeed...
Don’t question the magic...
CORRECTION:
“...and murdered their prophet.”
FACT:
Joseph Smith, horndog and destroyer of private property,
was jailed for his actions (trying to steal married men’s
wives and then destroying a printing press that was critical
of his horndog endeavors).
While in jail with a couple henchmen, one smuggled Joseph
a gun. When the crowd approached, the horndog/destroyer/
murderer, tried to get off a few shots at the crowd.
In the end, Joseph Smith was out-gunned.
He received rough prairie justice for his violations of
the sacred marriage covenant and for violating the law
of private property - and of course, for initiating
gunfire.
CARRY ON...
You may not be as familiar as you think you are.
Each ward gets several copies of the full book. One of these copies is to be kept in the Clerk’s office so as to be accessible to members.
In addition, each person called to a leadership position of any sort receives an abridged copy of the CHI containing the material relevant to their particular calling.
Having served as both a clerk and executive secretary, I can tell you the CHI is used to answer policy questions. I’ve used it several times to clarify church positions on various things that came up during bishopric meetings.
The idea that this is some dark or sinister book is ridiculous. This is nothing more than the LDS church protecting copyright on its published works. Since the LDS church has absolutely no power over the life of anyone who is not a member, the idea that exposing the book is some sort of whistle blowing operation is moronic sophistry.
For later.
But, but, but...
That’s not what we were told!
Interesting. I see censorship is alive and well on this thread today. Hope you enjoyed post #19 before it got zapped.
I Freepmailed the mods to ask why post#6 was zapped and who was whining about it, so far:
crickets chirping.
Censorship Ping
I see that even their own facts are in dispute if posted by one not of the chosen...
I did enjoy it, you saw my response, which strangely is still there.....
“The idea that this is some dark or sinister book is ridiculous. This is nothing more than the LDS church protecting copyright on its published works. Since the LDS church has absolutely no power over the life of anyone who is not a member, the idea that exposing the book is some sort of whistle blowing operation is moronic sophistry.”
You are absolutely correct. I’ve seen the book before, and I’m (gasp)a woman. It’s nothing more than a reference. Collected positions and procedures for things that are not secret, but need to be made available for the thousands of lay church leaders. This is just another way for Mormon-haters to poke us in the eye.
Um, and what is new about this?
Thanks noob for joining up in defense of Mormonism. It happens more than one could possibly imagine.
Ah, now comes the Mormon echo-chamber. This thread is no longer worth reading ...
Leave your golden underwear at post#1 before you leave the thread, LOL
I’m outta here too, let the Morons rule whatever is left.
Most Christians capitalize the "H" in HE when referring to the Savior.
That said, the "prophet" died in a shoot-out in which he killed two men. And it appears that mormons have a REAL problem with anyone making public factual information about mormon history, doctrine and practices...just ask anyone who has been opposing the mormon proselytizing on FR about the censorship attempts going on RIGHT now! Threads pulled, threads locked, "mutiple abuse reports", etc. etc....
Not to mention the spamming of the forum with the posting of whole books of mormon propaganda, most in "ecumenic" posts where debate is strictly limited.
I suggest you cry your river somewhere else.
Opposition against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will likely weather a group of self-righteous, self-appointed, Internet nerds with delusions of grandeur, ordered by LDS church leaders to shut down any opposition to church secrecy.
ROTFL...cool! So the leaders don't trust the members with "material NOT relevant to their particular calling?
They worried that someone might spill the beans to an "unworthy" member or something?
I can't WAIT for elsie to get hold of a copy!!!
The mods could save a lot of work for themselves if the abuse reports were made public. That said, censorship on things mormon is nothing new at all.
This is why I say this website will not succeed against the LDS church. Those who oppose the church have tried, for more than a century and a half, everything up to and including murder to destroy the church and yet the church has only gotten larger and larger. So, its unlikely that a handful of anonymous, narcissistic computer nerds will aid the cause of anti-Mormonism. If murderers and thugs couldn't bring the church down, mouth breathing dorks, working in their mother's basement don't stand a chance.
Heh, heh...
Indeed...
Or, it could have been that the mod actually felt your comment was inappropriate on his or her own. Maybe? Naaah! Its all a conspiracy to silence you! Are there any Jews involved in this or is it just us darn Mormons? What about blacks? Or Space Aliens? Bat Boy? What? Are precious bodily fluids involved?
A gun a guard gave to him, in jail? Bwahahahaha, who gave him the gun? Bwahahahaha
Why wait for a copy? Just make stuff up. You guys are good at that. Golden underwear, for example.
Paging Mr. Coyote or Mr. Colofornian...history lesson required.
With ears stuffed shut and eyes closed tightly, do you think it would really help to offer the history?
I enjoy reading it again, and there might be a lurker out there somewhere......
"Joseph Smith taught the moon was inhabited by people who dressed like Quakers and lived to be about 1000 years old. In the Mormon publication,
The Young Woman's Journal, pp. 263 & 264, O.B. Huntington gives this interesting information: "As far back as 1837, I know that he [Joseph Smith] said the moon was inhabited by men and women the same as this earth, and that they lived to a greater age than we do -- that they live generally to near the age of 1000 years. He [Smith] described the men as averaging near six feet in height, and dressing quite uniformly in something near the Quaker style." Now that man has walked on the Moon, there can be no doubt that there aren't any 6 foot tall Quakers roaming its surface."
I know, details, they are easy to over look, kind of like all the time you tried to paint the Mittster as a conservative despite the facts. Must be a thing with you guys...
I know, details, they are easy to over look, kind of like all the time you tried to paint the Mittster as a conservative despite the facts. Must be a thing with you guys...
Secondly, the man who "smuggled" Smith a gun was one of the prison guards, not a Mormon. It was said he felt sorry for Smith but it could have been that he was giving the mob a pretext for killing him.
Thirdly, why was there a mob outside Smith's jail cell? Were they there to say hello? Visit with him and gently persuade him to change his ways? Or were they there with the specific intent of murdering Smith when he had no way of escaping or surviving their attack? So, a bogus charge places Smith in a small jail cell where it would be a simple matter of killing the trapped victim, like shooting fish in a barrel.
But hey, two of the murderers were killed in the commission of their crime so, they were entirely justified in killing Smith. Smith and his six shooter were a clear and present danger to the one hundred or so armed men surrounding the cell. I mean Smith watched his brother die in his arms, killed by the gunmen at the door so what possible reason could he have had for firing his pistol? Clearly an unreasonable use of fire arms. Unlike the hundreds of totally justified rounds that were fired into the jail cell and the dozens of rounds that were pumped into Smith's body after he was dead. Completely understandable, right?
OOOOOOOO! You're in big trouble now! the local Mormon-bashers will get all bent out of shape in no time flat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.