lol @ the utter absence of anything even remotely documented.
It's a shame to see supposed believers behaving that way.
No, you don't; you love doing this.
I don't have to, thank God.
So wrong again.
You’ve shot yourself in the foot here.
Getting back to the motivation$ of men and their copyrighted invention$:
I have in my hand
The Holy Bible, the actual title of the King James Bible. Neither on its indicia page, nor elsewhere, is the word “copyright” found. It is in the public domain.
Conversely, modern translations are protected by
copyright law. Permission must be obtained from, and fees paid to, the men who claim to own these derivative works. And different publishers have different terms.
There are fundamental differences between a “
copyright” and a “
letters patent."
Copyright: "The legal protection given to authors and artists to prevent reproduction of
their work without
their consent. The
owner of a copyright has the exclusive right to print, reprint, publish, copy and sell the material covered by the copyright."
The New Standard Encyclopedia, volume 3, page 565.
LETTERS PATENT. The name of an instrument granted by the government to convey a right to the patentee; as, a patent for a tract of land; or to secure to him a right which he already possesses, as a patent for a new invention or discovery; Letters patent are a matter of record. They are so called because they are not sealed up, but are granted open. Vide Patent.
Bouvier's Dictionary of Law, 1856.
A Letters Patent is about
preservation; a copyright is about
restriction.
So this is how it plays out in the real world:
Obviously the KJB's crown patent is not the same as a copyright, as it was created before copyright laws. The proof is in the pudding, as anyone may reproduce the text, throughout the world, freely. God had his Bible done before the invention of the copyright. The crown patent simply related to the care and control of printing an accurate text back then and was overseen by the government which 'authorized' the text. That same government, although now liberal, still has the responsibility of guarding the veracity of the text within England. They have always allowed anyone in the world to print it, and consequently could never go back and change their mind and not allow this. Even if one wanted to say it had a copyright, that copyright would be null and void, because they have set the precedent of allowing it to be printed worldwide. One of the legal caveats about current 'copyright' law is that if you do not restrict people from printing your material, you lose your right to come back later and insist that they do. So either way, the KJB, as the word of God, unlike the modern copyrighted versions
of the KJB, is not bound.
God made certain that the historic English Bible (e.g. KJB) had the correct "equivalency"
long before copyright laws were created worldwide. He makes certain that the antique
Queen's Patent is
never enforced to curtail its spread in Great Britain.
Such double mindedness again. Either "you are free" OR you must abide "within certain limits." Can't have it both ways.
Can't seem to find Dale Carnegie anywhere in the Holy Bible. Try Amazon? -->
https://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671027034
You mean closer to the unsaved critics.
Ignorance is truly bliss (but for a season).
