Copyrights and Licenses for the church
January 30th, 2007
In most corporate websites that I develop, I would include links to two pages named ‘Terms of Use’ and ‘Privacy Policy’ at the footer of the website. Privacy Policy serves to assure the users that although information are collected from the users to give us feedback on the websites, we will not be able to identify anyone individually unless you choose to do so otherwise. I generally do not have problem with the document ‘Privacy Policy’, but as I look at a ‘Terms of Use’ document I drafted out for a non-profit organisation 2 years ago, I started feeling very uncomfortable, and that it might not be suitable for use by a church.
Headers included in a “Terms of Use†document:
- Proprietary & Copyrights
- Restrictions on use of contents
- Intellectual Property Rights
- Disclaimer of Warranties and Liabilities
- Rights of Access
- Members Account, Password and Security
Basically, in the first three headers, the organisation lays claims to all ownership of all the graphics, designs, music and content of the website, and explicitly states that no one is allowed to distribute the content of the website without prior written permissions. In fact, it claims full copyrights to all contents of the website; in other words, all rights reserved.
Should churches claim full copyrights to any creative work?
I used to think that churches, like other any other organisations, should be entitled to full copyrights of any creative works to recognise the hard work put in by the people who have worked hard to produced it.
But not any more.
I recognise that craftsmanship, skills in arts, music etc. are gifts of the Holy Spirit. It would be hubris for us to think that we are entitled to such skills. We are not entitled to anything. It’s by His grace that we are given such talents, and all glory must go back to Him. But more importantly, we all belong to a body of Christ. The body of Christ is not restricted to the church. It is a global body of Christ, one that transcends beyond boundaries. Spiritual gifts are given and must be used to edify one another:
1 Corinthians 12
7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.12The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ.
By claiming full copyrights, then are we giving due credit to God? Are we allowing other churches to make use of the inspirations, which ultimately come from God? We are called to serve God, not for our self-exaltation.
What alternatives are there?
The Creative Commons License looks like a plausible alternative to full copyrights. It allows anyone to “keep your copyright while inviting certain uses of your workâ€. I think this is to be encouraged. Firstly, it recognises the work and effort put in by man. Although man would ultimately need to learn to seek affirmations from God, but acknowledgements in other kinds always give a positive push to the worker. Furthermore, it allows distribution of the content, as long as the user give the due proper credit. I like the distribution part as we are all co-workers in Christ, brothers and sisters. Why then should we not share what our Father has so graciously given us?
So richly received, so richly give…
Entry Filed under: General
No comments yet.