Re: Fair use and posting Chris Shelton’s e-mail

Draco:And into the fray I go. I read what Gerry said on his blog. I do have a problem with the way he has posted this in that he appears to copy and paste his emails to Chris, but does not do the same with Chris’s replies. Instead he paraphrases and expresses his interpretation of what Chris has said in reply to him. Why not just copy and paste Chris’s replies and let us draw our own conclusions about this? I know it is his blog and he can do what he likes with it. The thing I dislike the most is insinuating that Chris is still pushing the church’s agenda. With what I have seen of Chris’s work, this is certainly not the case.
The whole IRS thing is so filled with conspiracy theories and lies and speculation. I don’t think it helps to speculate about how and why it occurred even though it had a huge impact on the way scientology operates.
What matters is that people keep talking about what really happens inside the church, to people. All of this talk and exposing the abuse will prevent the growth and continue the decline of scientology in the world. In the end they may still have money, but they won’t have people. That’s what counts in my book.
Yes, not having the official religious cloaking would make a huge difference, but fighting about what happened with the IRS does not help the cause at all. Just IMHO.1

I didn’t just post Chris’s replies out of an abundance of solicitude. This has been my reasoning since I started emailing:

“Keep in mind that all private email is considered to be copyrighted by the original author. If you post private email to a public list or forum, or forward it to an outside party
in whole or in part, you must include the author’s permission to post the material publicly. Not doing so can get you into legal jeopardy or trouble with your friends and associates.” 2

Fair use, of course, balances and in many circumstances is the most excellent of exceptions to the exclusive right of the copyright holder to prohibits publication. With the known facts, I have no doubt that I possess a fair use right to publish Chris’s emails.

Caroline and I have been dealing with copyright law and the way Scientologists beat people with it for many years, and we swatted them back with fair use before it was safely in vogue to publish their scriptures. 3

My comments, or as you call them my expressions of my interpretations, about what Chris had written in his emails actually create a greater fair use right to publication, since they constitute or evidence, among other things, commentary, criticism, research and teaching.

Anyway, despite my fair use right, I went to all the trouble of paraphrasing Chris’s emails, rather than just copy and paste them, to be courteous. He had also written that he wouldn’t be answering any more of my emails. And everyone can draw their own conclusions from my paraphrasing.

Nevertheless, because of the interest expressed, including by you, earlier today I sent Chris the email that follows,which is self-explanatory, and asked for his permission.

Dear Mr. Shelton:

In a comment on Tony Ortega’s blog, I mentioned my recent experience with you that started with your black PRing me on Facebook.
http://tonyortega.org/2015/02/…

“An astonishing recent attack on my credibility came from Chris Shelton, and it was directly on the issue of the IRS tax exemption. http://gerryarmstrong.ca/archi…
Shelton did not deal with the facts or the content of my evidence or argument,
just smeared me in relationship to Rathbun, and then would do nothing to
support or correct his smear. Shelton presented as someone who had rejected
Scientology, called himself an expert, claimed a high level of logic, had never
communicated to me, and cheer-leading “Justice for All.””

As you know, in my article “Chris Shelton: logic and loyalty, on the line,” I quoted my emails to you, but paraphrased your emails to me. http://gerryarmstrong.ca/archi… Some people at the Underground Bunker have questioned why; e.g., Draco:

“I do have a problem with the way he has posted this in that he appears to copy and paste his emails to Chris, but does not do the same with Chris’s replies. Instead he paraphrases and expresses his interpretation of what Chris has said in reply to him. Why not just copy and paste Chris’s replies and let us draw our own conclusions
about this?”

I did not publish your emails, of course, because I did not specifically have your permission to do so. This does not mean that I do not believe such publication would be fair use. As you know, the paraphrase I posted paralleled your email quite perfectly.

The issue and the emails between you and me concern public policy in which there is global public interest. The additional public interest in your emails’ exact text, and the
question of the accuracy of my paraphrasing, make posting them now even fairer fair use.

Giving me permission to publish your emails is the most logical thing to do, however, so I thought you should have the opportunity to give it. I am sure you can see good reasons for doing so.

Do I have your permission to publish your emails you sent me?

Yours courteously,

Gerry

Notes

Speak Your Mind

*