There is a post below about (c) infringement, which gets me thinking, are LDS scriptures copyrighted? At a cursory glance, no. On reflection, maybe yes to some extent.

* The Bible - not (c) to LDS, except footnotes, chapter headings etc.
* The JST - owned by CoC/RLDS, so no.
* The Book of Mormon - on the face of it, no. However, the LDS over the past while has modified it. There have been some changes in wording, chapter headings, and introductory material.
* The D&C - much the same as the BoM, except that the OD2, since it was made in 1978 will presumably still fall under (c).
* The PoGP - much the same as the last two. No idea about facsimiles. Presumably the AoF and JSH both have substantial modifications.
* Indexes, Bible Dictionary, Pronunciation Guide, Topical Guide, Ensign (Friend, New Era etc), conference talks, recent proclamations all count as (c) in my understanding.
* Translations of BoM, D&C and PoGP into other languages will all count as (c) if they have occurred within the past few decades.

Presumably, some allowance is made for short quotations in critical reviews, even anti, but this does raise the question of how much is a violation.

The Chinese are probably making a fortune publishing unauthorized Books of mormon!

But the import duties are killing sales ...

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Chinese are probably making a fortune
> publishing unauthorized Books of mormon!

Not really my point... It begs the question of whether the church can condemn or even prosecute the use of materials by its critics. I would say in most cases no, but if sufficient volume was used, then maybe.

The PRC being a Communist country doesn't really believe in copyright - that much is true - which has caused a few problems. However, I believe the Chinese BoM has been retranslated eithin the last thirty years, and if so, that retranslation would, I suppose fall under copyright in developed countries as an original work in its own right.

Considering much of it was plagiarized from other sources, well that would be rather disingenuous.

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Considering much of it was plagiarized from other
> sources, well that would be rather disingenuous.

The material which dates from JS' time would be entirely out of copyright, plagiarized or not. However, there is other content which falls into more of a gray area. OD2, is well within the limits of copyright, being written in 1978, as would most post-WWII translations of the BoM.

"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God ... as long as it was copied right."

Sorry.

Not sure about this, but I read somewhere that the BoM font is copyrighted. If so, I don't know if that applies to the literary text, or the cover. I'd be very interested if anybody has definite information on that.

Probably yes. But, as you describe, probably only for the newly added material, as compilations, or as derivative works based on the old, public-domain originals. 17 USC 103.

If you want to republish and distribute a 1923 edition (or older) of the mormon scriptures, or repackage the public-domain portions for your own "critical edition," then go for it. Nobody can stop you.

Jordan, this is an interesting thought.
And as Aloysius points out, adding new material to old, out-of-copyright materials, presto! You can then copyright that new 'interpretation.'

This gives a new insight onto the re-writes of the BoM--will they be re-issuing the BoM with the new changes, and be able to copyright it, and thus add a revenue stream?

Jordan, if you are coming out with a new edition, please make sure to share somewhere a photo of you in your funny hat with the peepstone!

This why there's a new "Sherlock Holmes" or "Tarzan" movie every couple of years.