What if I Stumble? links to an article about the Vatican copyrighting the Pope.
While I wouldn’t agree with Vittorio Messori that the Pope is “the principal interpreter of the Gospel,” I do agree that putting a copyright on all papal documents will surround the clergy [of the world’s largest Christian church] with the odor of money.
First, let me say that the concept of copyrighting one’s own work is not inherently wrong, even for religious works. Zondervan and (I’m sure) other Bible publishers copyright their works (which, unlike the words of the Pope, actually are the Words of God), and nobody seems to have a problem with it.
The Vatican seems to be setting itself up in an untenable position, though – both logically, and legally. Copyrights allow for fair use, and the example of Vatican-alleged copyright infringement given in the article seems to fall pretty well within fair-use provision. (I could be wrong.) Regardless, if the following is the intent of the copyright:
A Vatican spokesman said that the Holy See had to defend itself against “pirated editions”. The move is also aimed at “premature publication”.
Then the following use seems proper:
Journalists accredited to the Vatican are handed papal texts under embargo. The Vatican said that if embargos were broken in future not only would the journalist face sanctions but also his or her publication would face legal action.
But the Vatican’s additional use of that copyright seems wholly inappropriate:
Publishers will have to negotiate a levy of between 3 per cent and 5 per cent of the cover price of any book or publication “containing the Pope’s words”. Those who infringe the copyright face legal action and a higher levy of 15 per cent.
…
Officials said that newspapers would be free to publish extracts from papal documents without charge once they were officially released, but only by “prior agreement”.
I half hope the Vatican will attempt to enforce such penalties against a major US newspaper, and see just how far they get.
The bigger problem I have, though, is a more important one: If the Roman Catholic church believes that the words of the Pope are the very words of God, then they are not claiming to copyright the words of a mere man, but of God Himself. As the Pope is not God, then if the words he expresses are those of God, then the Pope, a mere man, would be claiming to be God by claiming a copyright on those words – since a copyright holder of a given work is the author of that work. If the Pope is a mere man, expressing his own words, then he has every right to copyright his original words and ideas, as expressed. However, if those words and idea’s are God’s, then God alone owns the “copyright” on those words.
So, by copyrighting what are claimed to be the words of God, is the Vatican by implication claiming that the Pope is God? And if the Vatican is NOT claiming that the words of the Pope are the words of God, then why do those words need extraordinary protection as afforded by the copyright claim? I don’t see how they can have it both ways.
P.S. Vatican: this move is not a good way to win friends and influence people for the Gospel…