Copyright on the Word of God

[Romans12]

Just a quick question… I don’t understand why Bibles, and it seems to be all of them have copyright stamped in the front of them.

Why is this… what am I missing???

Is it because they are different interpretations/versions of the Holy Word…

If this is so, I still don’t understand how it can be copyrighted… this word belongs to God surely… and has been handed down from generation to generation.

Am I to understand that using any of the sacred text or to reference chapter and verse in any form… ie leaflets, T-shirt, booklet… whatever is and infringement of copyright???

I am very confused about this, any help in explaining this would be greatly appreciated.

Thankyou

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

The word may belong to God, but the translation was the work of somebody who then holds the copyright.

Quoting the Bible gets into all kinds of issues of fair use and I’m not a lawyer. You can read information here from the US Copyright Office.

My own interpretation would be that if I were preparing something for my RCIA class, I wouldn’t worry about the copyright issue. If I were publishing a book of my own, I definitely would need to get permission to use the copyrighted work.

As an aside, a friend of mine has a book coming out soon. He originally used the NAB translation for his quotes. His publisher suggested the NRSV instead. It had nothing to do with which translation was better. However, the US Catholic Bishops hold the copyright on the NAB and apparently they charge a LOT to license its use. The owner of the NRSV copyright charges much less and so would leave more for his royalties.

 

[jblake]

Romans12;:

Why is this… what am I missing???

Luke 10:7; 1 Timothy 5:18: the workman is worthy of his wages.

If you are a cynic, then the issue is royalty payments.

If this is so, I still don’t understand how it can be copyrighted… this word belongs to God surely…

Federal statute defines what can be copyright. The translations of the Bible meet the criteria laid out in the legislation.

and has been handed down from generation to generation.

That might be true for the received version of the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Gregorian, Georgian, Coptic, and Syriac texts. However, what is most commonly published in those languages today, is a synthetic text. A text that has been reconstructed by linguists, and other scholars, in an attempt to determine how the text read, before copyists errors, and the like, were transcribed into the the received version.

These synthetic texts are copyright. The royalties they generate typically go to support translation projects.

The figure I’ve seen, is that it requires a minimum of US$10,000,000 to translate the Bible into a new language.

Am I to understand that using any of the sacred text or to reference chapter and verse in any form… ie leaflets, T-shirt, booklet… whatever is and infringement of copyright?

This gets into what constitutes “fair use”.

Different publishers define it differently. Most of them either have a statement saying what they consider to be "fair use"on their website, or in the hard copy Bibles. (Some Bible Study Software Programs display what the specific publisher considers to be fair use, for the translation.)

I’ll also point out that there are translations that are in the public domain, or have licenses that allow commercial usage, without requiring permission from the copyright holder(s).

I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.

xan

jonathon

 

[colliric]

as far as I recall, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth holds the Copyright to the King James Version, but it’s only enforced in England.

 

[Harmony1988]

Well I guess she inherited the royal copyright that KJ did as it was passed down.

Not that it really matters anyways.

 

[puzzleannie]

the other issue with all copyrighted material is that when it is quoted or copied for fair use, it cannot be changed or edited in any way and must be printed exactly as it stands, and that is to protect the content. It is not unheard of for reprinters to deliberately or accidentally to misprint, misinterpret and make omissions when copying.

if you pick up several editions of the KJV esp from deep discounters you will see a surprising amount of variation, since it is to all extents and purposes in the public domain, there is nothing to stop a publisher from lopping off entire verses or changing wording.

 

[colliric]

the other issue with all copyrighted material is that when it is quoted or copied for fair use, it cannot be changed or edited in any way and must be printed exactly as it stands, and that is to protect the content. It is not unheard of for reprinters to deliberately or accidentally to misprint, misinterpret and make omissions when copying.

if you pick up several editions of the KJV esp from deep discounters you will see a surprising amount of variation, since it is to all extents and purposes in the public domain, there is nothing to stop a publisher from lopping off entire verses or changing wording.

In England it is however not in the public domain, publishers in England actually require permission from the Queen, and she does hold the copywrite internationally but they do not enforce it outside of england.

 

[wraithx]

Surely the simply solution is to use the Douay Bible which is (presumably) out of copyright now - it is also the best English version of the Bible that exists.