Deseret News | Reader comments: Was LDS handbook posted illegally?

Reader comments
Was LDS handbook posted illegally?

Bob G | 6:26 a.m. May 15, 2008

It would seem that any books in a religion or religious practices should not have intelectual property rights. If it becomes intelectual property then it no longer can claim to be a religion, it then becomes a business. Do they also have intelectual property rights on the book of mormon or the Bible? Do they also maintain and have copyrights on such books? Religions should not have copyrights or intelcetual property rights on materials they print. The dispute is on organizational material that should be made public to its members as well as the public.

jackie | 6:34 a.m. May 15, 2008

Copyright laws are copyright laws and if they are breached by individuals for any reason they should be held accoutable and the situation rectified. People will do anything to make a point sheesh!!!! It's pretty dry reading if you ask me! Also, why not post a current copy, why an old one, things change?
Some people need to get a life and not be so obsessed with things that don't concern them.

Joseph | 6:35 a.m. May 15, 2008

I know that this is copyrighted material that the Church owns. But I believe that they have made a BIG mistake going after this. With all the press, people who would have never been interested in seeing a copy will now be curious. They will wonder what the Church is hiding from the world. In other words, more people than ever will be looking to obtain a copy and pass it on.

Comments continue below

No Brainer | 8:12 a.m. May 15, 2008

Enemies (yes enemies, not simply critics) of the LDS Church will do anything that they can get away with to try to smear the church.

They were probably counting on the church to give them increased publicity because they knew the church would have to protect its copyright by asking them to remove the illegally posted handbook.

Now they'll have a conveniently manufactured excuse to smear the church even more for being "secretive" simply because the church is doing what any other organization would do if their copyrighted works were illegally published.

Re: Bob G | 8:40 a.m. May 15, 2008

"It would seem that any books in a religion or religious practices should not have intelectual property rights. If it becomes intelectual property then it no longer can claim to be a religion,"

You obviously have a prejudiced ax to grind, but, that aside, you don't have a clue about copyright law.

Any individual or organization, whether religious or not, that produces an original work has every right to protect that work from being used by others without consent.

Take a look at any version of the Bible, King James, New International Version, whatever, and you almost certainly will find that some organization owns the copyright to that version.

For example:

Re: Bob G 2 | 8:42 a.m. May 15, 2008

Copyright Information
The NIV text may be quoted in any form (written, visual, electronic or audio), up to and inclusive of five hundred (500) verses without express written permission of the publisher, providing the verses do not amount to a complete book of the Bible nor do the verses quoted account for twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the total text of the work in which they are quoted.

When the NIV is quoted in works that exercise the above fair use clause, notice of copyright must appear on the title or copyright page or opening screen of the work (whichever is appropriate) as follows:

Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSIONï¿½. Copyright ï¿½ 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.
The "NIV" and "New International Version" trademarks are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by International Bible Society. Use of either trademark requires the permission of International Bible Society.

Do a little research before making baseless claims.

Re: Joseph | 8:48 a.m. May 15, 2008

"But I believe that they have made a BIG mistake going after this."

The church had to go after this if they wanted to protect their copyright.

People are free to draw whatever baseless, erroneous conclusions they choose.

Abee | 9:02 a.m. May 15, 2008

Since copyright laws have been violated, then Wikipedi/Wikimedia needs to remove ALL information on ANY copyrighted material. The law is the law and there is no gray area here. Be it an LDS handbook or a Harry Potter novel. It should be approved according to the copyright laws. People are going to be looking it up to see what all the hub-bub is about. Why make a big fuss over this? There is nothing in there that the LDS Church should worry about or hide from its' members or public. It shows organization, but it IS copyrighted. Take it out Wikipedia/Wikimedia.

Really... | 9:00 a.m. May 15, 2008

I can think of a couple of good reasons to keep the material copyrighted, and prevent people from posting it on the internet:
1) It keeps people from altering/printing their own version, which could be used for destructive purposes like confusing new members, etc.
2) It helps keep policy consistent throughout the world.
3) It means reporters, etc. need to come to the source (ie. the Church leaders) rather than a posting by questionable sources. If reporters, etc. would do this, think of all the confusion it would save!
Bottom line, if you have a question about the Church's practices or policies, ask an authorized source -- they're happy to help!!!

Just read it | 9:39 a.m. May 15, 2008

Makes a great read. People SHOULD realize the church is little more than a business, a HUGE corporation. It's one of the largest landowners in the state of Utah, owns a huge development corporation, raises cattle, fruit, owns canneries and farms, publishes newspapers and books, magazines and owns numerous radio and TV stations throughout the country. The church even toyed with the idea of launching its own satellite for broadcasting conference twice a year. So yeah, the the LDS church is one ENORMOUS money making organization, worth many many billions of dollars.

Anonymous | 10:18 a.m. May 15, 2008

There is nothing to get excited about in that book, it is organizational and that is all. I have a copy on my shelf as do countless others. That being said, I agree with the poster who said that it could be taken and altered by those who mean to do harm to the church. I believe that the article stated that the link showing the book was removed. By the way, I know where you can read a copy of the scout handbook, anyone want to read it, I hear it's really exciting. Really folks, the church has a right to protect things it owns as does anyone else, so don't make mountains out of molehills. It was there, it is gone, if you read it are'nt you the lucky one(sarcasm)

GW | 12:24 p.m. May 15, 2008

The "shocking" part about the Handbook of Instructions is that it's an operations manual that, at the end of every section, instructs Church officials to follow the Spirit if it dictates a different course of action.

Imagine that: a codified procedure manual that is built around the reality of God giving revelations to the mortals who direct His Church. Mainstream denominations deny the possibility of continuing revelation. It's the core of the LDS Church's operations.

That's what gets anti-Mormons so steamed. The LDS Church is an organization with the lines of communication to the "home office" that are still open. It's hard to compete with the "only true and living church" on the face of the earth.

Jason | 12:28 p.m. May 15, 2008

Regarding Abee's comment: the website in question is Wikileaks, which is not affiliated with Wikipedia/Wikimedia in any way.

To just read it | 12:51 p.m. May 15, 2008

Yes the LDS church is a big and valuable organization. that's why whenever there's a disaster anywhere in the world they can help. One of the best organized and most productive organizations in the cleanup efforts after the hurricane in New Orleans was the LDS church. I would guess that the LDS population in the area is pretty small, but they still showed up in numbers with needed commodities to help out those in need.

Anonymous | 5:46 p.m. May 15, 2008

The church claims it is only administrative procedures. This is not true. For instance, it is the ONLY source of the rights of those dragged into a religious court. Why should that knowledge be withheld from those who need to defend themselves? It's like, "Yes, you have rights in the proceedings, but what they are is none of your business."

Also, many couples drive themselves into abject poverty, having all the children they are capable of having, thinking this is what the church wants. The secret handbook says that the decision about children is private and to be made by the couple only, but again, this is a secret.

It defies logic.

Anonymous | 9:39 p.m. May 15, 2008

Isn't anything sacred or holy anymore? This is Copyrighted material and Wikimedia should respect the law.

I think that wikileaks partly complied by removing the link to one of the copies, but I don't see why wikileaks would even care to post this information in the first place if they truly "wish to reveal unethical behavior in their governments and corporations." This is religious material. Maybe the government leaks are too boring and don't stir up enough controversies to bring people to their site.

Anonymous | 3:56 p.m. June 6, 2008

I don't see what the big deal - it's just a handbook, what is the LDS church so upset about? Makes me wonder what they are hiding? Why not let the world read it? I don't see why the LDS would make such a big thing about it. Makes us non LDS wonder what is up their sleeve and why the secrecy.
Hmmmm.......so much about the LDS is secrets, secrets, secrets.......this just adds to it.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.