Are The Licensing-Pushers Intentionally Lying To Churches?
Old copy. Email for current version.
Suppression of the truth is equivalent to the expression of what is false.- Maxim of law admissible in court under the ancient documents rule
I have been stunned since the very first day I heard about worship copyWRONG licensing, that anyone could think the idea was constitutional.
For a while I assumed that because so many churches signed the licenses, I must have been missing the boat.
I too was swayed by the misleading advertising of the church copyright licensing industry.
And, being a writer and a publisher, I have every incentive to stay decieved.
The truth that is not sufficiently defended is frequently overpowered- Maxim of Law
But I "took the red pill" and I woke up.
The question still plagues me, "How could the licensors not know that the core of their business model is in direct contradiction to the constitution, the entire case law of this country, and the COPYRIGHT ACT itself?!"
They know, or ought to know that there is no bona-fide case to be made that a church could be successfully sued for unauthorized copyright use in a bona-fide, non-profit worship activity.
For 35 years, the licensing
Being naive as I am, I still hold out hope that the license-salesmen are somehow honestly mistaken - that they will read the law and change their business model.
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance.- Hanlon's Razor
