All this stuff about Scientology (todays example) and them using IP laws/copyright laws to get their way has got me thinking - what do other churches and religions have which they try to protect IP of?

And brought me eventually to this question:

Should an organization designated as, and getting the legal benefits of such, be entitled to claim and/or protect intellectual property or claim copyright?

I thought it was a reasonable question - and in my opinion they should not. I'd like to hear what others have to say on the topic - so please - discuss.

designated as what? I assume you mean a church or something

obligatory scientology sucks quote here

why shouldn't they?

Yeah trog, missing word - designated as a religious institution.

Jim, I guess because the basis of religion is on an idea/ideal, and not one of content. I can't see a need for anything to be protected in such ways as IP - corporations should, but why should they also enjoy the protections and exemptions they get should they wish to be exclusive and protect property for the purpose of financial gain? It certainly ceases to make then an NPO...

Am I the only one who thinks that using intellectual and church is the same sentence just doesn't make sense?

no youre not dirtyape .... no youre not ....

no youre not dirtyape .... no youre not ....

Cheers dude I thought for a second I was losing me marbles again

Hmm it's a tough one because it really comes down to a couple of different ways of viewing things.

1. You trade of the value of tax-free status against the value of the IP in question and ask whether its a fair trade. In scientologys case their IP makes them a dickload of money because you have to pay for their stupid books and s*** to progress in the religion

2. You question what the freaking point of being a religion is to start with. I always thought that religions existed to help people and to bring them into the fold. You'd argue that secretive nature goes against this goal. In my opinion you can see a parallel to the Catholic churches policy of giving mass only in Latin (pre-luther), a policy which effectively shut 90% of the populace out of knowing wtf their religion was all about.

It's all a sham. Faith is one thing, religion is an entirely different beast.

Jim, I guess because the basis of religion is on an idea/ideal, and not one of content. I can't see a need for anything to be protected in such ways as IP - corporations should, but why should they also enjoy the protections and exemptions they get should they wish to be exclusive and protect property for the purpose of financial gain? It certainly ceases to make then an NPO...

even though it might be, it doesn't have to be about financial gain, it can just be about avoiding loss.

Protecting IP doesn't stop an organisation being a not-for-profit....npo's have just as much right to protect they're revenue/potential revenue as anyone else. What makes them not-for-profit is that the organisation does not exist to create a profit...it exists to provide a service...and to provide any service an organisation needs income.

Whether various religions aren't real npo's for a bajillion other reasons is a perfectly valid debate however.

I just can't think of an example of any religious organization or church other than the CoS enforcing IP. Can anyone else?

Most churches IP predates IP protection :)

You'd probably find that major churches would have a problem with you bandying about their internal memos and documents. They might protect them with IP (though other laws would apply anyway).

I'd imagine some of those crazy American churches might get lawyered up if you started selling pirated videos of their sermons. They probably make a bit of money of that nonsense.

But no, i'm not aware of anyone actually doing it.

God ™

the catholic church protects most of their valuble IP with vaults and guards in their own make-believe country which they've convinced other countries to recognise.

at least CoS stifles critism through IP enforcement, the followers of some other religions use actual violence and intimidation.

i'd rather be sued than stabbed to death in the street.

"This is my made up imaginary deity. Go get your own!"

last edited by infi at 16:57:09 15/Apr/08

at least CoS stifles critism through IP enforcement, the followers of some other religions use actual violence and intimidation

are you serious?

It probably should have said...

at least CoS stifles critism through IP enforcement, the followers of some other religions used actual violence and intimidation

The Crusades?

I do find it interesting that religion and churches in particular are there to spread the word of God™ (or Allah, Xenu, Flying Spagetti Monster) but want to hide how they do it? I think being an NPO is irrelevant really.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here Jim, are you disagreeing that followers of other religions are violent, or disagreeing that CoS don't get violent?
Example: Mass riots and assassination of Danish cartoonists.

I think there has been an example of a church using copyright to stop people writing about them. Scientology or Raelian or something

Religion and common sense do not mix.

I'm referring to all the controversy and conspiracy surrounding CoS and their actions against people who start making a public noise about them

I am not aware of any churches (that i associate with at least) that copyright/IP anything? Most churches that write their own music obviously license it so they can sell CD's & songbooks in a professional manner but other than that there isnt anything i can think of. A lot of larger churches even make CD/Podcasts of the sermons available for small cost (cover the CD and wirting equipment) or free (podcasts) straight after the service.