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...
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.