-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Permission to use a Bible?
- Thread starter av1611jim
- Start date
All the hand ringing about someone makeing a profit off the publishing of a bible is pointless and silly! If you don't want them to make money, don't buy it! It is ethical to protect your own work, whatever it is and ethical to allow others to do the same of their work. It would be unethical to force someone to publish their work without being allowed to recover the costs involved in producing the work and make a profit from said work.
Jim, far as I know, the AV was the 2nd English Bible authorized by a king, and it was used to make a profit for both the printer, Robt. Barker, and the Crown, with the TAX STAMP. I believe that almost every earlier English BV was sold for profit, and in germany, the Luther Bible was certainly sold for profit.
Most of those who print Bibles are not Christians, and are simply NOT in the business of printing Bibles gratis, nor allowing copyrighted versions to be freely reproduced. No one gives away copies of older Bibles that have value to collectors. Like it or not, Jim, that's the way the cookie crumbles.
I have a KJV, from World Books Co. that was printed in CHINA. Someone somewhere made a handsome profit from it, and its fellow copies. And, yes, it's COPYRIGHTED. It has a unique concordance & set of maps. We must face it, most Bibles are copyrighted and may not be freely reproduced outside of its intended fair use.
Most of those who print Bibles are not Christians, and are simply NOT in the business of printing Bibles gratis, nor allowing copyrighted versions to be freely reproduced. No one gives away copies of older Bibles that have value to collectors. Like it or not, Jim, that's the way the cookie crumbles.
I have a KJV, from World Books Co. that was printed in CHINA. Someone somewhere made a handsome profit from it, and its fellow copies. And, yes, it's COPYRIGHTED. It has a unique concordance & set of maps. We must face it, most Bibles are copyrighted and may not be freely reproduced outside of its intended fair use.
PASTOR MHG
New Member
Excellent conclusion in your last post Jim!
Your friend,
Max
Your friend,
Max
OK, back to first principles. av1611jim asked:
What bothers me is the fact that, evidently, one must get permission to use a Bible?
Since it isn't a fact, your fears and/or objections and/or criticism are built on a false premise. Therefore, what according to you is "evident," in fact assumes facts not in evidence, and hence your "bother" is completely without merit.
There, are you happy now? Am I being "honest" enough for you? Sheesh.
What bothers me is the fact that, evidently, one must get permission to use a Bible?
Since it isn't a fact, your fears and/or objections and/or criticism are built on a false premise. Therefore, what according to you is "evident," in fact assumes facts not in evidence, and hence your "bother" is completely without merit.
There, are you happy now? Am I being "honest" enough for you? Sheesh.
Well, it appears that av1611jim has PM'd me demanding that I stop calling him a liar (which by his own standards I never did), demanded that I cough up evidence for things I never asserted, and then put me on his ignore list so that he couldn't read the evidence even if I felt like sending it to him.
Consider my point made, Jim.
Consider my point made, Jim.
G
Gottit
Guest
You left out the most important permission, that of Almighty God for use of the King James Bible!
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
My Oxford KJV Wide Margin -printed 1993 in England has this.
"All rights in respect of the Authorised King James Version of the Holy Bible are vested in the Crown in the United Kingdom and controlled by the Royal Letters Patent. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording and otherwise, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature, without without written permission. "
It has not study helps, only centre notes.
Is that a copyright?
"All rights in respect of the Authorised King James Version of the Holy Bible are vested in the Crown in the United Kingdom and controlled by the Royal Letters Patent. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording and otherwise, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature, without without written permission. "
It has not study helps, only centre notes.
Is that a copyright?
Roby has said succintly what I have been trying to point out. Regardless of your BV of choice, "permission" ought not be controlled by any man.
Copyright your OWN book, that is good and proper. But leave God's Book alone.
In anticipation of the question that is sure to be repeated; What about "false" translations like the NWT? I think that discernment is up to the guidance of the Holy Spirit of God.
And; "What about the people who will be fooled into thinking they are legitimate translations?" I reply; What is the difference between them and say, for example the Living Bible? Certainly nobody here will say that the Living Bible is a reliable translation/paraphrase. So what is the difference?
No Hank. This is not just a revival of a dead horse. I am not trying to compare the KJV and other BV's. As has been pointed out, the KJV does have a copyright. This is also wrong, in my view. Only God has the "right" to give or withhold permission to use His Book in any form. And since it is evident that He has allowed many men to mess it up,(i.e. NWT, Inspired Version for two examples) who are we to step in and make demands where He has not?
In HIS service;
Jim
Perhaps I should clarify a bit further.
Copyright of one's notes study helps etc. perhaps should be coyrighted. But the Text should not.
So, in my view a Bible's copyright should read something like this.
No part of the notes, study helps, maps, etc can be reproduced... blah blah blah.
The TEXT of Scripture may be FREELY used in whatever form a person so desires up to and including re-publication but NOT for profit.
Maybe that is "pie in the sky" but I don't think so.
In HIS service;
Jim
Copyright of one's notes study helps etc. perhaps should be coyrighted. But the Text should not.
So, in my view a Bible's copyright should read something like this.
No part of the notes, study helps, maps, etc can be reproduced... blah blah blah.
The TEXT of Scripture may be FREELY used in whatever form a person so desires up to and including re-publication but NOT for profit.
Maybe that is "pie in the sky" but I don't think so.
In HIS service;
Jim
Thing is, Jim, in a perfect world, there'd be just one universal BV, easily read & understood by all, freely reproduced by whoever. However, in the real world, there are many imperfections, and while copyrighting the text of a BV may not seem kosher, that's the way things are, and I reckon we'll just hafta live with it for now.
Jim, make your own translation and then copyleft it. It will solve the problem.
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/copyleft.html
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/copyleft.html
Is it a danger for Bible translations not to have a copyright since an unscrupulous printer could publish the text with his own corruptions or corrections of that text?
William Tyndale encountered this problem when his text was printed as though it was still Tyndale's when it actually had many changes introduced by George Joyce.
William Tyndale encountered this problem when his text was printed as though it was still Tyndale's when it actually had many changes introduced by George Joyce.