So did God breathe it into Kenyon, Stiles and Leonard first...
Yes.
God loaned the info to them so that they could prepare it for VPW borrowing it. Now it's been loaned to us, so that we can loan it to others.
God and his workers are not preoccupied with silly things like earthly ownership of intellectual property that came from God. We do not worship intellectual originality, as if the human brain were to be praised for it.
God owns His words and he freely gives them to us all to use.
*/*/*/*
Here are some workers with the right idea, that human ownership of ideas intended to bless God's people is a trivial thing that will fade with time. If BG Leonard were to be upset that VPW blessed us with "BG owned material" then BG was out of fellowship, and forgot the attitude that God had when He inspired him in the first place.
Look at the attitude of these people for their copyrights !! It is gentle and simply asks to be mentioned... if convenient.
"You're free to share these comics. Yes, that includes in sermon notes, church bulletins, doctoral theses, on your website and as graffiti in subway stations. Just don't forget where you got them, don't alter them, and try to give credit and maybe a link."
God loaned the info to them so that they could prepare it for VPW borrowing it. Now it's been loaned to us, so that we can loan it to others.
God and his workers are not preoccupied with silly things like earthly ownership of intellectual property that came from God. We do not worship intellectual originality, as if the human brain were to be praised for it.
God owns His words and he freely gives them to us all to use.
*/*/*/*
Here are some workers with the right idea, that human ownership of ideas intended to bless God's people is a trivial thing that will fade with time. If BG Leonard were to be upset that VPW blessed us with "BG owned material" then BG was out of fellowship, and forgot the attitude that God had when He inspired him in the first place.
Look at the attitude of these people for their copyrights !! It is gentle and simply asks to be mentioned... if convenient.
"You're free to share these comics. Yes, that includes in sermon notes, church bulletins, doctoral theses, on your website and as graffiti in subway stations. Just don't forget where you got them, don't alter them, and try to give credit and maybe a link."
Wow here is a new business model for sure.
God “loaning” IP.
How does that lease model work? Is it like big pharm where you only get exclusive rights for 10 years then it becomes generic? But at least big pharm can recoup research investment in the first 10 years.
Here BG got his class pilfered immediately.
God is not preoccupied with silly things like earthly ownership?
Why then did He inspire authorship of all the detailed OT instruction regarding property ownership?
This is very telling.
Symptomatic of the uneducated cult mentality when a logical dilemma arises address it with superstition and reject any logic.
There are plenty of things powered by collaboration and sharing. The Linux operating system freely powers the world through efforts of a team maki by the product open source.
However proprietary things are not free for the public anywhere. People are prosecuted legally for stealing all the time.
VP lived before the internet age and owned a printing press to avoid IP issues.
Also people who benefit from freely shared IP typically also contribute back IP as well. Not use it to isolate themselves and never give back to the common group
God loaned the info to them so that they could prepare it for VPW borrowing it. Now it's been loaned to us, so that we can loan it to others.
God and his workers are not preoccupied with silly things like earthly ownership of intellectual property that came from God. We do not worship intellectual originality, as if the human brain were to be praised for it.
God owns His words and he freely gives them to us all to use.
*/*/*/*
Here are some workers with the right idea, that human ownership of ideas intended to bless God's people is a trivial thing that will fade with time. If BG Leonard were to be upset that VPW blessed us with "BG owned material" then BG was out of fellowship, and forgot the attitude that God had when He inspired him in the first place.
Look at the attitude of these people for their copyrights !! It is gentle and simply asks to be mentioned... if convenient.
"You're free to share these comics. Yes, that includes in sermon notes, church bulletins, doctoral theses, on your website and as graffiti in subway stations. Just don't forget where you got them, don't alter them, and try to give credit and maybe a link."
So, God, who claims he's a just and loving God, would take the bread out of one of his kids mouth and give to another one. Not a very just and loving thing to do.
Also, if God doesn't care about "silly" things like intellectual property rights, why did you state you would copyright Raf's position on the Absent Christ? Shouldn't that be freely shared? A bit hypocritical, don't you think? (Now's your chance to see how big a hit you'll get.)
If God doesn't care about intellectual property rights, then why did Saint Vic copyright the works he stole from others?
And, to take it a step further, if intellectual property rights dont matter then why is the way international so agressive in suing any perceived/actual copyright infringement when they feel someone is using their copyrighted material?
Plagiarism is the act of taking someone else’s work or ideas and presenting them as your own. Plagiarism is most commonly associated with written work, such as research papers or books, but it can also occur with artistic expressions or in spoken work, such as a speech. While it is true that imitation is the highest form of flattery, such imitation is only flattering when proper credit is given to the original. When proper credit or permission is not given, imitation becomes plagiarism.
Plagiarism isdishonestbecause it advances a falsehood, passing off as one’s own the work of another, and the Bible has much to say about lying (e.g.,Exodus 20:16;Proverbs 6:17). Plagiarism is also self-seeking, since the plagiarizer attempts to promote himself through the stolen work, and the Bible condemns self-seeking (seeRomans 2:8;Philippians 2:3;2 Timothy 3:2). Plagiarism is also stealing, and the Bible has much to say about the evils ofstealing(e.g.,Exodus 20:15). To steal is to take something that belongs to another, without permission, and make it one’s own. It’s easy to see how taking someone’s physical property is wrong. But taking someone’s intellectual property is just as wrong. Ideas, creative work, and written expressions belong to the person who created them. Plagiarism takes from the creator what was produced from his or her own mind and heart. Plagiarism robs authors, artists, musicians, and other creators of their right to profit from their own original work. It also robs them of the right to build a reputation based upon their work.
Stealing is a sin that was part of our old lives, not to be continued after we meet Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:17).Ephesians 4:28says that stealing must be replaced with something good: “Anyone who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need.” This principle applies to the theft of intellectual property as well. If plagiarism has been a part of someone’s old life, it must be renounced and confessed to the Lord as sin (see1 John 1:9). In order to live in honesty and integrity, we must give proper credit to people whose work we admire, and we should request permission before using the work of others as part of our own creations. Plagiarism has no part in the life of a follower of Christ (1 Peter 4:15).
If God doesn't care about intellectual property rights, then why did Saint Vic copyright the works he stole from others?
Good question.
From what I heard VPW's attitude was much like that statement from the Coffee With Jesus website I linked and quoted above.He eschewed the idea that it should be hoarded.I once heard an old SNT tape where he talked about “seeds being scattered” according to God’s purposes. People were lamenting the grads who took the class and then took off. He said they were like seeds scattering God’s blessings in ways other than TWI. I think he felt similarly with "his" material.
VPW never copyrighted the SNT tapes in his lifetime.
Those old SNTs are now public domain.TWI tried to squelch this with their lawyers, and totally failed.I know the lawyer who stood them down, by inviting them to take the case to court.
I was the branch AV man from 1972 to about 75 in my first branch. I never saw a copyright notice on the film or on the videos of the class.I cleaned the films at HQ 1976-78, and never saw a copyright notice.
After 1982 I noticed a copyright notice on the videos.I think the lawyers were able to get through to Craig, where VPW had resisted them.The SNTs were then copyrighted also.
There is some use of the copyright in these matters. It can protect the “property” from alterations.It can prevent some other person from copyrighting it, and effectively stealing it, and preventing the author from using it.
Bull$h!t. He not only hoarded what he stole from others, he also demanded money for the goods. dont have $100? Tough, you dont get the class. Dont have money for the books? Tough you dont get them. Dont have enough money to continue your corps trainimg? Tough, you can stay as long as your money holds.
From what I heard VPW's attitude was much like that statement from the Coffee With Jesus website I linked and quoted above.He eschewed the idea that it should be hoarded.I once heard an old SNT tape where he talked about “seeds being scattered” according to God’s purposes. People were lamenting the grads who took the class and then took off. He said they were like seeds scattering God’s blessings in ways other than TWI. I think he felt similarly with "his" material.
VPW never copyrighted the SNT tapes in his lifetime.
Those old SNTs are now public domain.TWI tried to squelch this with their lawyers, and totally failed.I know the lawyer who stood them down, by inviting them to take the case to court.
I was the branch AV man from 1972 to about 75 in my first branch. I never saw a copyright notice on the film or on the videos of the class.I cleaned the films at HQ 1976-78, and never saw a copyright notice.
After 1982 I noticed a copyright notice on the videos.I think the lawyers were able to get through to Craig, where VPW had resisted them.The SNTs were then copyrighted also.
There is some use of the copyright in these matters. It can protect the “property” from alterations.It can prevent some other person from copyrighting it, and effectively stealing it, and preventing the author from using it.
So he never copyrighted the SNT. Big deal, considering the tapes acted as a commercial for PLAF.
Even Mystery Science Theater 3000 used end of their early broadcast with "KEEP CIRCULATING THE TAPES."
So why then didn't he freely share the collaterals and other written material?
And again, why did you say you were going to copyright Raf's position post on the Absent Christ.
There is some use of the copyright in these matters. It can protect the “property” from alterations.It can prevent some other person from copyrighting it, and effectively stealing it, and preventing the author from using it.
You're talking out both sides of your mouth. You copyright something to prevent others from copyrighting it, stealing it, yet it's okay for Saint Vic to steal it directly.
So he never copyrighted the SNT. Big deal, considering the tapes acted as a commercial for PLAF.
Even Mystery Science Theater 3000 used to have are the end of their broadcast "KEEP CIRCULATING THE TAPES."
So why then didn't he freely share the collaterals and other written material?
And again, why did you say you were going to copyright Raf's position post on the Absent Christ.
One can never overlook that fact that wierwille likely wasnt savvy enough to understand the value of copyrighting his own materials until 82. I mean he had his lusts fulfilled: private airplanes, money rolling in that was misappropriated, a seeming endless supply of young vulnerable young women to prey on, endless praise and adoration, etc.
It might be proveable except for the fact it is mostly plagiarized.
So did God breathe it into Kenyon, Stiles and Leonard first so VP could steal it?
No because God also authored the 10 commandments. In tablet form.
Proof completed.
100% not God breathed.
If we were to understand it by living it we should rip off famous preachers lie about it publish our own books and start a cult.
According to Mike, it was ok for vpw alone to do it because God told vpw to do it- He told vpw what to plagiarize, where to find it, etc. But if YOU do it with vpw's books, it's wrong.
One can never overlook that fact that wierwille likely wasnt savvy enough to understand the value of copyrighting his own materials until 82. I mean he had his lusts fulfilled: private airplanes, money rolling in that was misappropriated, a seeming endless supply of young vulnerable young women to prey on, endless praise and adoration, etc.
vpw wasn't savvy enough to copyright the tapes. vpw slapped a copyright on every single book, starting with the first ones that he plagiarized all down the line. See, Mike, you can't have it both ways. Either it's wrong to plagiarize everybody- so don't plagiarize vpw but he was wrong to do it first, or it's perfectly fine to plagiarize everybody so it's ok to plagiarize vpw all you want. You've claimed vpw was ok to plagiarize, but if we do it to vpw's books, it's wrong.
According to Mike, it was ok for vpw alone to do it because God told vpw to do it- He told vpw what to plagiarize, where to find it, etc. But if YOU do it with vpw's books, it's wrong.
I just can't for the life of me figure out how God can contradict his own will by telling victor Paul wierwille to steal from others and also become a respecter of persons. God cannot change. But he told wierwille copy others and then copyright what he stole claiming it was his own. That's up there with God making a hologram if Jesus.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
82
50
43
92
Popular Days
Jan 31
120
Feb 1
100
Feb 4
65
Feb 2
65
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 82 posts
T-Bone 50 posts
Bolshevik 43 posts
OldSkool 92 posts
Popular Days
Jan 31 2023
120 posts
Feb 1 2023
100 posts
Feb 4 2023
65 posts
Feb 2 2023
65 posts
Popular Posts
waysider
I knew someone who died trying to make it work. Then, the ministry blamed him for not having big enough believing. He left behind a wife and 2 young kids.
WordWolf
Every once in a while, in society and here, there's someone who engages in this specific fallacy. "I must be right because I'm in the minority." "I must be right because lots of people keep insistin
chockfull
As a different direction with respect to all of the philosophical angles on the law of believing, I am considering Jesus teachings in Matt 6:27 “which of you by taking thought can add one cubit to his
Mike
Yes.
God loaned the info to them so that they could prepare it for VPW borrowing it. Now it's been loaned to us, so that we can loan it to others.
God and his workers are not preoccupied with silly things like earthly ownership of intellectual property that came from God. We do not worship intellectual originality, as if the human brain were to be praised for it.
God owns His words and he freely gives them to us all to use.
*/*/*/*
Here are some workers with the right idea, that human ownership of ideas intended to bless God's people is a trivial thing that will fade with time. If BG Leonard were to be upset that VPW blessed us with "BG owned material" then BG was out of fellowship, and forgot the attitude that God had when He inspired him in the first place.
Look at the attitude of these people for their copyrights !! It is gentle and simply asks to be mentioned... if convenient.
http://www.radiofreebabylon.com/coffeewithjesus
"You're free to share these comics. Yes, that includes in sermon notes, church bulletins, doctoral theses, on your website and as graffiti in subway stations. Just don't forget where you got them, don't alter them, and try to give credit and maybe a link."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Wow here is a new business model for sure.
God “loaning” IP.
How does that lease model work? Is it like big pharm where you only get exclusive rights for 10 years then it becomes generic? But at least big pharm can recoup research investment in the first 10 years.
Here BG got his class pilfered immediately.
God is not preoccupied with silly things like earthly ownership?
Why then did He inspire authorship of all the detailed OT instruction regarding property ownership?
This is very telling.
Symptomatic of the uneducated cult mentality when a logical dilemma arises address it with superstition and reject any logic.
There are plenty of things powered by collaboration and sharing. The Linux operating system freely powers the world through efforts of a team maki by the product open source.
However proprietary things are not free for the public anywhere. People are prosecuted legally for stealing all the time.
VP lived before the internet age and owned a printing press to avoid IP issues.
Also people who benefit from freely shared IP typically also contribute back IP as well. Not use it to isolate themselves and never give back to the common group
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Very telling in deed.
Was your gross misrepresentation accidental, or on purpose?
Here is how you mis-characterized it:
"God is not preoccupied with silly things like earthly ownership?
Here is what I wrote:
"God ... not preoccupied with silly things like earthly ownership of intellectual property that came from God."
Why did you cut off the crucial second half of my sentence?
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
So, God, who claims he's a just and loving God, would take the bread out of one of his kids mouth and give to another one. Not a very just and loving thing to do.
Also, if God doesn't care about "silly" things like intellectual property rights, why did you state you would copyright Raf's position on the Absent Christ? Shouldn't that be freely shared? A bit hypocritical, don't you think? (Now's your chance to see how big a hit you'll get.)
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Because it is completely illogical.
God does not have one set of standards for property and another for “intellectual” property.
Therefore leaving off the second half of the sentence changes nothing.
Apparently the density is real high so we need to explain this. Peoples entire jobs exist around IP. Meaning food clothing shelter.
I used clear examples which you glossed over like big pharma. This is even more telling. Why do you think you can just skip over logic and ignore it?
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Sounds to me like a deliberate mis-characterization, then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Okay then characterize it correctly. As opposed to sniping and hiding.
How does God rob Peter to pay Paul?
How does this work exactly?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
If God doesn't care about intellectual property rights, then why did Saint Vic copyright the works he stole from others?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
No it means nothing. Substitute one sentence for the other and it changes not one bit of the meaning.
You are going after the windmills in your own mind.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
You just proved your cognitive skills are disengaged.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
And, to take it a step further, if intellectual property rights dont matter then why is the way international so agressive in suing any perceived/actual copyright infringement when they feel someone is using their copyrighted material?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Cutting through all the rationalization, here we are again having to explain to mike the most basic ethical issues in life. So be it.
https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-plagiarism.html (I have no doubt mike will disregard the source because its not wierwille: but for those reading along who still have an unseared conscience)
Plagiarism is the act of taking someone else’s work or ideas and presenting them as your own. Plagiarism is most commonly associated with written work, such as research papers or books, but it can also occur with artistic expressions or in spoken work, such as a speech. While it is true that imitation is the highest form of flattery, such imitation is only flattering when proper credit is given to the original. When proper credit or permission is not given, imitation becomes plagiarism.
Plagiarism is dishonest because it advances a falsehood, passing off as one’s own the work of another, and the Bible has much to say about lying (e.g., Exodus 20:16; Proverbs 6:17). Plagiarism is also self-seeking, since the plagiarizer attempts to promote himself through the stolen work, and the Bible condemns self-seeking (see Romans 2:8; Philippians 2:3; 2 Timothy 3:2). Plagiarism is also stealing, and the Bible has much to say about the evils of stealing (e.g., Exodus 20:15). To steal is to take something that belongs to another, without permission, and make it one’s own. It’s easy to see how taking someone’s physical property is wrong. But taking someone’s intellectual property is just as wrong. Ideas, creative work, and written expressions belong to the person who created them. Plagiarism takes from the creator what was produced from his or her own mind and heart. Plagiarism robs authors, artists, musicians, and other creators of their right to profit from their own original work. It also robs them of the right to build a reputation based upon their work.
Stealing is a sin that was part of our old lives, not to be continued after we meet Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:17). Ephesians 4:28 says that stealing must be replaced with something good: “Anyone who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need.” This principle applies to the theft of intellectual property as well. If plagiarism has been a part of someone’s old life, it must be renounced and confessed to the Lord as sin (see 1 John 1:9). In order to live in honesty and integrity, we must give proper credit to people whose work we admire, and we should request permission before using the work of others as part of our own creations. Plagiarism has no part in the life of a follower of Christ (1 Peter 4:15).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Good question.
From what I heard VPW's attitude was much like that statement from the Coffee With Jesus website I linked and quoted above. He eschewed the idea that it should be hoarded. I once heard an old SNT tape where he talked about “seeds being scattered” according to God’s purposes. People were lamenting the grads who took the class and then took off. He said they were like seeds scattering God’s blessings in ways other than TWI. I think he felt similarly with "his" material.
VPW never copyrighted the SNT tapes in his lifetime.
Those old SNTs are now public domain. TWI tried to squelch this with their lawyers, and totally failed. I know the lawyer who stood them down, by inviting them to take the case to court.
I was the branch AV man from 1972 to about 75 in my first branch. I never saw a copyright notice on the film or on the videos of the class. I cleaned the films at HQ 1976-78, and never saw a copyright notice.
After 1982 I noticed a copyright notice on the videos. I think the lawyers were able to get through to Craig, where VPW had resisted them. The SNTs were then copyrighted also.
There is some use of the copyright in these matters. It can protect the “property” from alterations. It can prevent some other person from copyrighting it, and effectively stealing it, and preventing the author from using it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
In the beginning there was the loan. And the loan was with the Lender. And the Lender became the Loan Shark.
As seen on TV!
Mark Cuban: “that sounds sacrilegious - and for that reason I’m out”
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Bull$h!t. He not only hoarded what he stole from others, he also demanded money for the goods. dont have $100? Tough, you dont get the class. Dont have money for the books? Tough you dont get them. Dont have enough money to continue your corps trainimg? Tough, you can stay as long as your money holds.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
So he never copyrighted the SNT. Big deal, considering the tapes acted as a commercial for PLAF.
Even Mystery Science Theater 3000 used end of their early broadcast with "KEEP CIRCULATING THE TAPES."
So why then didn't he freely share the collaterals and other written material?
And again, why did you say you were going to copyright Raf's position post on the Absent Christ.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
You're talking out both sides of your mouth. You copyright something to prevent others from copyrighting it, stealing it, yet it's okay for Saint Vic to steal it directly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
One can never overlook that fact that wierwille likely wasnt savvy enough to understand the value of copyrighting his own materials until 82. I mean he had his lusts fulfilled: private airplanes, money rolling in that was misappropriated, a seeming endless supply of young vulnerable young women to prey on, endless praise and adoration, etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
I wish I could upvote the above post 50 times.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Thanks!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
According to Mike, it was ok for vpw alone to do it because God told vpw to do it- He told vpw what to plagiarize, where to find it, etc. But if YOU do it with vpw's books, it's wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
vpw wasn't savvy enough to copyright the tapes. vpw slapped a copyright on every single book, starting with the first ones that he plagiarized all down the line. See, Mike, you can't have it both ways. Either it's wrong to plagiarize everybody- so don't plagiarize vpw but he was wrong to do it first, or it's perfectly fine to plagiarize everybody so it's ok to plagiarize vpw all you want. You've claimed vpw was ok to plagiarize, but if we do it to vpw's books, it's wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
I just can't for the life of me figure out how God can contradict his own will by telling victor Paul wierwille to steal from others and also become a respecter of persons. God cannot change. But he told wierwille copy others and then copyright what he stole claiming it was his own. That's up there with God making a hologram if Jesus.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.