Published by Someone asked a question about why I put a copyright on what I post and if they can use it somewhere else. Here is the answer. If someone wants to repost something, they need only ask – personal e-mail, unless I feel that the place it is to be posted or used is wrong. Then the answer is an unequivocal “no”. There is one thing I have seen that causes me to totally reject. This is someone who wants to use one of my posts to say something they don’t have the guts to post but they can post and blame it on me. When I discern this and ask questions the person almost always shows where their heart is by their response.
I get good questions at times and some of them have wider application to the church. When I do, I write the answer and then post it, being careful to never mention something that points back to the individual that asked the question unless I have their permission to use it. I would only ask for permission if their name adds something to the post. To date that has not happened.
I was asked some questions about the way I use a Copyright notice on my items. Allow me to explain. I am not a lawyer, but I am a pretty well versed layman on the subject. To OFFICIALLY copyright something it is necessary to file a copy with the U.S. Copyright Office, accompanied by a form and a check for $25. (The last time I checked this was the fee.) They file the document and that can be used as legal definition that what you have is copyrighted on that date. This can be used to say, “I wrote this before this date, the alleged infringing document was created after this date so it is an infringing on my Copyright.” It does not bring any government help if there is infringement.
If the document has the notation, Copyright 1999, your name, it is considered under the law a copyrighted document and the copyright is legally enforceable. I have told the reader, this is not public domain. You cannot use it without permission. What I do not have that I would have if I filed it with the government is a firm proof of the date I wrote it. I must prove it in another way. But posting it here provides some of this documentation by the fact that it was publicly posted and Yahoo keeps a copy that is legally dated. Most of my documents have very strong proofs I have many of them on the web, I could have Yahoo attest that they have been there for let’s say, 5 years. I have copies that are older. Not as nice and firm as a US Copyright office, but pretty good. And if the posting is on a Yahoo group or web page, they will honor my copyright. I complain to Yahoo, the post disappears.
Where does this put someone who tries to use it?
If they are just plain dishonest I probably will not sue because they probably have nothing to take. If they are Christians with integrity I will privately ask reasonable compensation but only if they are making money with the item. If they are making money, this should not be a problem. If they are misusing it on the web, I can go to their host and say, “Take them down or face legal action.” Since the host has a stake in the lawsuit, it usually comes down. Yahoo for one is very sensitive to that.
Another reason I have recently been given is that if God has given me something for the body of Christ it should be given to all. I have no problem with this but if God gave it to me, I, not you have the mandate to properly handle it. There are times I have felt that certain things should not be posted in some of the groups I post in and have not posted them there. There has only been one time I have felt to question the person on use. Frequently questions discern hearts.
There is another much more important reason why I do this. I believe the body of Christ is one of the prime offenders in stealing intellectual property. Yes, I used the nasty “s” word. I see that as something that must change. Organizations like CCLI which licenses music for churches to use are a good example of where we need to go. If your church or ministry is using copyright music without a license it is dishonest and you running a serious risk. You can get away with it for years and then bang, someone shows up at the door with a summons. One church here in York some years ago had to pay into 5 figures or some of its deacons could have gone to jail. They were not paying license fees and someone caught them. There is one music license holding company that is very adept at catching violators and it is difficult to properly license their material. I would not use any of their music for anything. They have gone after people who made mistakes as aggressively as they do willful violators. A CCLI license is so cheap that it is like fire insurance, too cheap to not have. Note that I do not get kickbacks from CCLI. You pay your fee and you report what songs you use. If you are interested they have a web page. What CCLI does is take those fees and spread them over the writers based on how often their songs are used. This is a step in the right direction. CCLI is now offering a license that allows a church to show videos that previously were not legally available. If you are using videos for home use or recorded off TV in your church you are most likely in violation of the law.
What about things I have written? If your church or ministry wants to use something I have written, contact me. I have granted specific uses free of charge. In fact I have never asked a church for a penny. I might under some circumstances if the church were to be using the piece to make money. I have always asked that the piece not be altered and that there be proper credit given. I have asked a national secular magazine for money and they paid without question. What I believe a church should do in these cases (with others as well as me) is offer an honorarium for anything they use, based on size of the printing and article. If you want to know what is appropriate you can find out what is paid for like items. Note that I have said I have never accepted a penny. I believe it is right to offer, the writer has the right to make the decision of whether to take it. I could hand the check back or give it to another ministry. It is the attitude of the heart, not the amount of money that counts.
There is a one-use clause. It generally covers something that is used once, like a pastor reading it somewhere or making a copy for a file to reference later. These are generally not a violation of copyright. But be careful with the one use clause. It may be OK to read something once from the pulpit but if it is taped and copies made or televised, or it is transcribed and copies printed, that almost certainly violates the one use rule. In fact, the taping for archive or transcribing for the same reason may violate that rule.
Now for the nasty part of my post. In the churches I have been in I have pressed to properly license computer software, properly pay for use of copyright material and even provide a small honorarium when someone allows something significant to be used without charge. Even if the check is for $5, it is the idea that the item is worth something. It encourages the person to continue, even if they sign the check back to the church and where that is done, this often happens.
I personally know two men who are writing Christian music. I can remember when they got their first royalty check. They were from CCLI and were about $5. It was not the money. Both of these men have substantial secular careers. It was simply this; someone was using their music. Someone was being blessed by it. That is why they write. The reason for the check, not the amount was important.
