Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bob Pickle]

Since this topic has been touched on elsewhere a number of times, I'm starting a thread dedicated to it.

Most recently questions about copyright have come up. The lawsuit mentions copyright issues, but then doesn't make that one of its counts. Why?

I can't see any reason why they mention copyright at all, since 3ABN has argued in court that none of their programming is copyrighted. I know of nowhere where they have announced a change in that regard.

Why does the lawsuit mention copyright issues when none of 3ABN's programming is copyrighted, and when copyright infringement isn't one of the counts?

[Gregory]

Bob, I will insert my comments in the text of your quote in brackets  [   ] with my initials added  (GM).

Since this topic has been touched on elsewhere a number of times, I'm starting a thread dedicated to it.

Most recently questions about copyright have come up. The lawsuit mentions copyright issues, but then doesn't make that one of its counts. Why?

[The complaint in a lawsuit does not have to list everything associated with the charges in a numbered count--GM.]

I can't see any reason why they mention copyright at all, since 3ABN has argued in court that none of their programming is copyrighted. I know of nowhere where they have announced a change in that regard.

[Bob, when you have a charge of trademark infringement, a copyright violation is often associated with it.  There is future value in mentioning copyright as an issue in the initial filing without listing it as a specific count--GM.]

Why does the lawsuit mention copyright issues when none of 3ABN's programming is copyrighted, and when copyright infringement isn't one of the counts?

[Because copyright infringement does not have to be associated with their programining.  However, I will point out that the iniital filing clearly associates a copyright issue with a specific program.  So, 3-ABN has specificly excluded at least one program from the public domain--GM.]

[Bob Pickle]

Gregory, when specifically did 3ABN exclude the program with the infamous tribute to alleged pedophile Tommy Shelton? You state that they excluded it. When did they? Did they exclude it before it entered the public domain, or did they fraudulently attempt to exclude it after it had already entered the public domain?

Also, did they amend or correct their pleadings in their property tax case to reflect the fact that it was no longer true that none of their programming was copyrighted?

If there really was a change of policy, which I highly doubt, where are the board minutes that reflect that change? If there are no such minutes, who made the decision to change the policy? Where is the public announcement to that effect so that no one would ignorantly infringe 3ABN's copyright?

On what basis did 3ABN decide to exclude from the public domain that sole broadcast, which happened to contain the infamous tribute to alleged pedophile Tommy Shelton? Why apparently only that broadcast? Why that particular one?

You mention a copyright violation often being associated with a trademark violation. I think you are suggesting that even if there was no broadcast in question, there would still be a copyright issue, but I'm uncertain what exactly you are referring to.

[Fran]

Bob,

You should listen to a real lawyer, not an alleged, arm chair, lawyer wanna be.  Arm chair legal advice is just that, "Arm Chair".  It carries zero authority, unless they have been forced to defend themselves in a federal court of law! 

If my memory serves me, Danny and 3ABN wanted Linda out of IL so they could register their 3ABN Trademark.  They needed her gone so she couldn't do it before Danny did and she also couldn't be there for the now famous board meeting.  You know, the one where there were 2 evil men in their midst?  The sheriff was called to man handle them off the compound.  I am sure Johann can refresh your memory since he was allegedly one of the evil ones!.

On another note, off topic, the 3ABN Today credits this weekend did not include Danny Shelton!  First billing went to Jesus Christ, but no Danny Shelton as producer!  It is about time!  Jim Gilley was second as President or producer, I am not sure.  I was too busy looking for Danny Shelton!  Zilch, Nada, gone!  I am so proud of them for that!  To me that impresses me more than anything so far.

[Gregory]

Bob, I am not going to debate you point by point.

My job is not to teach you law.

As to your comment:

You mention a copyright violation often being associated with a trademark violation. I think you are suggesting that even if there was no broadcast in question, there would still be a copyright issue, but I'm uncertain what exactly you are referring to.

Exactly.  Copyright and trademark are closely entwined.  Even if there was no broadcast a violation of trademark could also carry with it a violation of copyright.

Frankly I did not understand that until the lawsuit against you and Gailon was filed.   But, I do now.  If you want to understand it, you need to obtain competent legal advice.

 
 
 
 

[Bob Pickle]

Gregory,

I didn't ask you to teach me law.

If 3ABN did not prevent that particular broadcast from entering the public domain, then I don't think they can retrieve it from the public domain after the fact.

Since you can't copyright a name (#5 in this link), I fail to see what copyright issues there can be concerning a trademark suit over Save3ABN.com.

[Artiste]

Here is an excerpt from the letter sent to Gailon on January 30, 2007, by Gerald Duffy, Law Offices of Siegel, Brill, Greupner, Duffy & Foster in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Mr. Duffy is one of the five partners in the sixteen lawyer Minnesota law firm allegedly used by Garwin McNeilus.

"...you have inappropriately copied and posted a lengthy excerpt from a 3ABN broadcast on the website referred to above. This action constitutes a violation of 3ABN's exclusive copyright on all audio and video productions created by the Network and on all television transmissions of the same, and is a blatant violation of federal law."

Mr. Duffy's confident assertation of 3ABN's copyright status is not matched by the language in the lawsuit.

But then lawyer's letters are often meant only to be threatening and coercive rather than having legal authority.

[Bob Pickle]

Should Seventh-day Adventist supporting ministries hire lawyers to write threatening letters that have no basis in law or fact? WWJD?

[bonnie]

Should Seventh-day Adventist supporting ministries hire lawyers to write threatening letters that have no basis in law or fact? WWJD?

Bob
Stuff like this is for what?? If a good many of us said No, then what? Where would you take that except for 20 pages kicking it back and forth.
 Personally this looks like grasping at straws.

Should SDA members have to sue a pastor of the denomination in order to protect the children involved?? My simple mind says NO, but trust me we did and most didn't care.

I can think of many words related to this lawsuit that would not pass the test of WWJD.

I am not involved in the lawsuit and have nothing to gain. But I gotta tell you this stuff is fast eroding support.

I mistrust DS and the gang,but you and Gailon are not coming out like a bouquet of roses either.

[Bob Pickle]

Should Seventh-day Adventist supporting ministries hire lawyers to write threatening letters that have no basis in law or fact? WWJD?

Bob
Stuff like this is for what?? If a good many of us said No, then what? Where would you take that except for 20 pages kicking it back and forth.
 Personally this looks like grasping at straws.

Should SDA members have to sue a pastor of the denomination in order to protect the children involved?? My simple mind says NO, but trust me we did and most didn't care.

Sounds like apples and oranges. On the one hand we have Shelton et. al. having attorneys write nasty letters to silence people who are concerned about child molestation allegations. That's quite different from suing to protect children.

"WWJD" was also an allusion to a username over on BSDA.

[bonnie]

Sounds like apples and oranges. On the one hand we have Shelton et. al. having attorneys write nasty letters to silence people who are concerned about child molestation allegations. That's quite different from suing to protect children.

"WWJD" was also an allusion to a username over on BSDA.

I don't mean this sarcastically, but what do you plan to do about all the extra getting thrown in here. If the victims don't or can't come forward then what? I know how hard that can be,but at the end of the day that is what needs to be done.
TS and the allegations of child molestation has been brought how many times now?? Tell me where after the first couple of times it has had any impact.

Nothing you are saying is going to change the fact. Hopefully enough awareness has been brought to bear that at least there is not such easy access to the vulnerable. But you will not accomplish anymore than that on this issue.

You cannot look to the church membership as a whole to care. Have you ever heard the words "He was doing good things for the Lord, so we didn't know what to do"?  I did many times I know you have as I have read similar statements concerning the good work 3ABN is doing. The majority of the denomination will not back you. Even if they did, so what? You cannot do anything about it. As for the questions you throw out there in determination to try to one up the 3ABN crowd, what is that for? Doesn't make a difference what the answers to your questions are. If it is not illegal and current you are not going to change things, except it looks worse for your side.
Gnawing at ever thing you can think of doesn't hurt them, it hurts you

[Bob Pickle]

I don't think hiring a lawyer to write a nasty letter not based on law and fact is a little matter. Seventh-day Adventists are called by God to be ethical and above board in all that they do.

We should continue to call for repentance, confession, restitution, revival, and reformation regardless of how many don't care.

[SDAminister]

I am not involved in the lawsuit and have nothing to gain. But I gotta tell you this stuff is fast eroding support.

I'm not so sure they had much support to start with.

[Sister]

I don't think hiring a lawyer to write a nasty letter not based on law and fact is a little matter. Seventh-day Adventists are called by God to be ethical and above board in all that they do.

We should continue to call for repentance, confession, restitution, revival, and reformation regardless of how many don't care.

I have remained silent for a while, merely reading and thinking about what has gone on in the most active 3ABN related threads lately and have concluded the following: much of the continuing argumentation is of little consequence, except the last line bolded above. I shall repeat it again:We should continue to call for repentance, confession, restitution, revival, and reformation regardless of how many don't care. Christians are a people group called individually to live by and champion Biblical principle, regardless of the indifference of self professed fellow believers. I have no desire to engage in written battle with those who have swept Biblical principle aside and have chosen to look to themselves for guidance. They have a fool as their captain and their poorly chosen path will surely lead to destruction. I have never called for the downfall of 3ABN, nor have I ever attacked it as a ministry. What I have focused upon is the wickedness that was hidden behind the scenes and called for a cleansing of 3ABN, beginning with Danny Shelton. To repeat again what Bob has said, the heart of the matter is the continual call for repentance, confession, restitution, revival and reformation within the leadership and management of 3ABN, regardless of how many don't care.

[GRAT]

I'm not so sure it is that they didn't have that much support as it is that a whole lot of the church doesn't know what is happening or has not taken the time to know.  My mom had a problem with her 3abn receiver.  A man from her church came over last week to see what the problem was.  She needed a new one and I was telling him that I didn't want any support to go to 3abn.  He sells their receivers and helps people install.  He asked why and I gave him a short version.  He did not know about the lawsuit or that TS was not a SDA.  Does now.  The Review won't take on the issues and if the church paper won't report on it how do people get to know.    (watching the Olympics)