KJV and copyright

Refreshed --

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to say
that those who hold copyrights are not normally
withhout heart or common sense regarding their
ownership of materials. I have written to those
holding copyrights on many things and have
never been refused the right to copy something I
needed.

I have gotten permission to copy music, unusual
Bibles, comic strips for repeat publication, and
more. They just want us to be honest and do as
the law requires.

 

The KJV is under a crown copyright and is PUBLIC DOMAIN,so copy & distribute as you wish.

 

I know one thing, I learned something today, Thanks.

 

The Squire opined, above:

Squire

I believe that you are in error on this point. You seem to be mixing US Copyright law and U.K. copyright law. In the U.K. government documents are copyrighted by the crown In the U.S., Federal government documents are automatically placed in the public domain. However, documents produced by state, or local governments may or may not be copyrighted. It would be wise to find out before reproducing them.

In another life (before disability) this was one of my areas of responsibility. In that capacity, it was occasionally necessary to request permission to cite U.K. government documents from Her Majesty's Stationary Office, London.

As for the copyright reverting to the 13 colonies. Just ain't so. British copyrights were and still were, as I understand it a crown perogative. Perhaps one of our British Board Members will correct me if I am wrong, but don't think so.

As for the crown's continued claim to copyright to the Authorized Version, I believe they do make such a claim. How enforceable that claim might be, I am not competent to say.

Hope it helps.

Jeff

 

As I mentioned in an earlier post, my copy of the King James Version has the copright notice in the front,,and is dated up to 1945 (the year I was given that particular Bible in London, England). My North American KJV do not have the copyright warning in the front, but they have a New York publisher. Could this be the difference? I don't know.

Does it all really matter? Most of us quote from the other Bibles without regard for the copyright, unless we are doing a scholarly publication.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Dear Jim,

In one sense KJV copywrite doesn't matter, we all (well, most anyway) agree that the KJV is the Word of God at least by manuscript derivation whether it is copywritten or not.

To many of the more radical KJVO however it is a bone of contention, which contention in my estimation is less than useless because it causes dissention and stife among the brethren.

Psalm 31:20 Thou shalt hide them in the secret of thy presence from the pride of man: thou shalt keep them secretly in a pavilion from the strife of tongues.

HankD

 

Refreshed said:

Stated flatly - the KJV is public domain. The modern versions are restricted as to distribution.

OK, since you insist on making a big deal out of the copyright argument, answer this:

Was the KJV the Word of God before it passed into the public domain?

 

Jim 1999 said:

Does it all really matter? Most of us quote from the other Bibles without regard for the copyright, unless we are doing a scholarly publication.

Scholarly or not, quoting from other Bibles for proof-texting, preaching, public reading, etc. isn't an infringement of copyright anyway, according to the "fair dealing" provisions of copyright law.

Does it matter? Hardly. The 500- or 1000-verse limit, for which Zondervan and other publishers explicitly grant permission, is more than ample for anything short of a major reference work. (500 contiguous verses is the equivalent of about the first half of Genesis.) And given the cost of wholesale duplication of the Bible, it's probably cheaper just to buy them from the publisher anyway.

This is why the KJV-onlyists' harping about copyright is such a non-issue.

 

No they are not. You can distribute however you want to. They are restricted as to copying.

 

The KJV was once a modern version.

 

You want someone to aruge about your apology? Why? It was very nice, no need to argue it.

 

You want someone to aruge about your apology? Why? It was very nice, no need to argue it. </font>[/QUOTE]I am still formulating an argument. It is much harder than the other stuff on this forum

 

Refreshed said:

Yeah, but it wasn't [a modern version] when I wrote that!

So did the KJV auto-magically become the Word of God after it stopped being a "modern version"?

Or did it become the Word of God after its copyright lapsed?