[12210] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Enforcing copyright chills religious discourse
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jim Warren)
Fri May 15 20:12:05 1998
Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 12:43:24 -0500
From: Jim Warren <jwarren@well.com>
To: PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU>
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
[{Also BCC'ed to some friends} Recirculate however you wish.
I just sent this to the Letters Editor of the San Jose Merky News -- but
it's applicable to *every* publisher and civil libertarian. Editors: If
your religious editor dared to include any substantive <copyrighted>
documentation in a review of Scientology! "Chilling" ... isn't it?!
Note: This is NOT-at-all a criticism of Scientology, the Religion. --jim]
To the Letters Editor --
There are two constitutional principles that were unmentioned or ignored
when a jury awarded $75,000 to the enforcement arm of the tax-exempt Church
of Scientology -- a chilling penalty imposed on a church critic after he
published several pages of copyrighted church secrets on the Internet:
1. The First Amendment prohibits any "law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press ..."
The freedom to be *critical* of religious teachings is a crucial
component of religious freedom -- as well as of [soundless] speech and
[paperless] press. But how can one be critical of religious teachings when
one is prohibited from disclosing them?
2. In this case and many other "intellectual property" cases, judges and
juries completely ignore the entire constitutional justification for
copyrights (and patents), namely, "To promote the progress of science and
useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the
exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."
Pray tell, which science or useful art is promoted by allowing a
religious group to keep its teachings secret by copyrighting them?
Even more irriting is the Scientologists' practice of copyrighting small
collections of paragraphs, thus precluding "fair use" publishing of
excerpts for review or criticism, since any useful excerpt must include
most of the entire copyrighted work.
Suppressing well-documented religious criticism perverts copyright laws and
makes a farce of First Ammendment religious freedom.
--jim
Jim Warren [activist in burnout; columnist; hedonist wannabe (wonder how?)]
345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; 650-851-7075; fax-for-the-quaint/650-851-2814
[self-inflating puff: Hugh Hefner First-Amendment Award, Playboy
Foundation; James Madison Freedom-of-Information Award, Soc.of Prof.
Journalists-Nor.Cal.; Electronic Frontier Foundation Pioneer Award (in its
first year, 1992);
founded InfoWorld magazine; Computers, Freedom & Privacy confs; blah blah blah]
