Why shouldn't she have been paid, Cause? That was a paid position.
As for LS, I don't think he got any more money from it, and if I wrote it, I would have gifted it. Dr. Bob felt the same way when he wrote the trustees in 1940, refusing royalties for his work. Bill overrode that, though, and Dr. Bob did get paid. I am not incorrect; I said "writings" which isn't limited.
It obviously wasn't. Helen Wynn got paid because she was Bill Wilson's mistress.
If you want this information to disappear off the web, please go to the nearest church basement and pray to the AA god for a miracle. Don't leave until the miracle happens.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Every time I read your posts I am convinced more that you really have a very limited firsthand knowledge of AA. The grapevine is not a itty bitty pamphlet, it has many stories and is about 50 pages or so. Living Sober is a small yellow book, no doubt it is much more comprehensive
but it is not this voluminous book. Here is a question Causy, how many pages does Living Sober have? Obviously not as many as you think.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
danny, the last written page of Living Sober is page 88. It is the second page of the appendix entitled "A report from a group of physicians in A.A." It's in this appendix where AA admits that members have persuaded members of quit taking their medications.
"A.A. members and many of their physicians have described situations in which depressed patients have been told by A.A.s to throw away the pills, only to have depression return with all it's difficulties, sometimes resulting in suicide."
After that pages 89-92 are blank, but numbered, apparently for notes. The grapevine is a collection of short articles by many different authors. Any other questions?
I chose to try and remember. I have the book Living Sober, but I have it packed away so where. I have been trying to locate it.
I have never argued that there are people in AA giving out advice concerning medication. It has always been my position that this is reckless and totally irresponsible. I have said it more than once during a meeting that I felt it isn't responsible to give advice to someone taking medication prescribed by a doctor.
Now I will say this I witnessed a good friend of mine, who is in AA, have an adverse reaction when prescribed Lithium. I was instrumental in helping this friend get off that drug.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
That's my girl! Awesome find Avo. Gawd, what a cold, hard slap in the face for that poor author. Well leave it to AA to continue ripping off its authors. Wow. Just Wow.
Don't "think" Clara, it is against the scripture of Bill Wilson.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
You got it. I really felt sorry for the man when I read this. Imagine waiting "patiently" as he did for over a decade, wondering when the checks would start coming. He really believed in the Billshit, thought they would honor his claim, and called them out on their so-called principles before personalities.
As usual we are taking the facts and warping them. Barry it could be said, didn't even write the book all by himself. He was given old drafts, some were unsatisfactory and others were incomplete. He was told to put it all together in a book for $4000.00.
Seems Barry later on didn't like the original deal and wanted to go back to the till for more. Guess what it didn't work as it wouldn't anywhere else. A deal is a deal.
JR and Causy this is why no one except for maybe 5 people here take either one of you seriously. You both are disingenuous with the information you present here.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Here is my understanding based on my experience.
If I was paid a salary or lump sum without a contract to create a book then the copyright belongs to my employer.
If I created a book on my own accord without payment or contract then the copyright is mine, even without formally registering the work with Library of Congress and paying the small fee. The formal registration of copyright with Library of Congress is a formality that provides additional protection. My guess is that since he accepted payment and did not copyright the work or have a contract no lawyer will take the case.
That is my understanding of the law based on the copyrights I have filed.
The judge is the judge of the law while the jurry is the judge of the evidence.
My guess is that the evidence is a cashed check for $4000 and some testimony.
It depends on whether you are an independent contractor or an employee. If you are an employee, the copyright belongs to your employer if the work was created within the scope of your employment (unless there is a contract stating otherwise). If you are an independent contractor, the copyright belongs to you unless you signed a work made for hire contract (and the work falls within one of several categories). At least that is how it is under the 1976 Copyright Act. I'm not sure what the law was before then.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
They never discussed it at the conference until these letters were sent if I am reading it right.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
If that be the case Penny, then a lawyer could slam dunk this for royaltyies plus a percentage of profits and damages. This guy could have a chunk of prudent reserve coming....
Well, I think he's dead. Plus the work was written before the 1976 Copyright Act, and I don't know what the law was back then. Also, although he might have had initial ownership, there might be other legal questions to answer such as whether he transfered ownership of the copyright or granted AAWS a license to use the copyright.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
From what I gather, he gave AAWS permission to print and sell the book. He just didn't get paid what he thought he would. Thus, at first blush, this looks more like a breach of contract case than a copyright infringement case, although there might be some overlap.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Clara is right, this guy Barry did not write the book, he more or less edited what was given to him at the start. The foundation for the book was already written pretty much. This is why he never got more then $4000.00. Now later on he saw the popularity for the book and tried to pull some BS to get more money. That is the slam dunk and trust me his estate is never getting anything.
In round table discussion t/o America this conversation has been discussed ad-nausea, people were on both sides of the discussion. Barry did not write the book, he edited a draft that was already written and made it better. So the idea was not his, the book did not originate from him.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
His estate sold it a Sotheby's for about 1.4 million. I think it is called "payback" for screwing him on Living Sober. The second time the original monolith manuscript was sold Hazelden bought it for just a little under 1 million. The Holy Grail of the AA movement went to a provider of Rehab, not the fellowship.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Do you know how he ended up with it? Someone already said it, his close relationship with a person important to AA's beginning. I'll tell ya, Lois was instrumental in Barry receiving the manuscript.
Nobody screwed anybody and if Barry was still here, he would tell you as much. You are making this shit up because as usual you find sensationalism better reading then the truth.
Barry was not given royalties because the idea for the book and the content did not originate from him. Plain and simple, he was a glorified editor. Should they have made a concession, no, absolutely not, then every editor would have been seeking ownership.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
This is the official website for the “Master Copy” of the Original Manuscript of the book, Alcoholics Anonymous.The Master Copy was purchased by Ken Roberts in June of 2007 at an auction held at Sotheby’s in New York City for a hammer price of $850,000 (with premiums, $992,000). Given the unpredictable nature of auctions, this same copy had previous sold at Sotheby’s for a hammer price of $1,4000,000 (with premiums, $1,576,000) in June of 2004.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Clara is right, this guy Barry did not write the book, he more or less edited what was given to him at the start. The foundation for the book was already written pretty much. This is why he never got more then $4000.00. Now later on he saw the popularity for the book and tried to pull some BS to get more money. That is the slam dunk and trust me his estate is never getting anything. In round table discussion t/o America this conversation has been discussed ad-nausea, people were on both sides of the discussion. Barry did not write the book, he edited a draft that was already written and made it better. So the idea was not his, the book did not originate from him.
Pennywise says:
No clue whether he has a case. I didn't say one way or the other whether he or his estate would prevail. However, if he compiled preexisting material in a way that as a whole constitutes an original work, then he would have a copyright.
As § 103 of the Copyright Act of 1976 states:
(a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.
(b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material.
§ 101 of the Copyright Act defines a compilation as:
[A]work formed by the collection and assembling of preexisting materials or of data that are selected, coordinated, or arranged in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship. The term “compilation” includes collective works."
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Lets say all the previous work handed to Barry, was edited and Barry realized that the entire content and format was junk and he declared he was starting over. Then I would say that even though the previous work influenced his work going forward, the content of the work was Barry's.
But this isn't how it happened, he accepted the content and improved upon it, therefore the original idea stayed intact. I have been involved in many conversations about this situation and they all end the same. Barry was a close associate and friend and because of that he truly felt he deserved more when the book took off, the book was a hit. Those people he was so close to were not there anymore, so the decision was based solely on business. Which if you look hard enough you will see he did not get screwed in a business sense.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Trisha, it does not matter what YOU say. It matter what the LAW says.
You said: "he accepted the content and improved upon it, therefore the original idea stayed intact.
The Copyright Act says:
"The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works" (§ 103(a));
and that
"[a] work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications,which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a 'derivative work'." (§ 101)
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Could be how peope justified the changes they made in the BB and could print it. If something is changed 10%, that can be considered a new work. If the BB weren't being changed, I wonder if there would have been any suits.
Of course they would have sued. The changes had nothing to do with it. Heck, I'm sure they would have authorized the changes in exchange for enough $$.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
I have no idea whether he even sued. Like I said, he seemingly gave AAWS permission to print and sell the book, so it appears more like a contract dispute over payment than it does a copyright suit over infringement. I think you might be wrong that he failed to meet the requirements for authorship. In short, the question is likley not whether he was the author, but rather, whether AAWS breached a contract agreement over its use of the work he (probably) authored. Of course, there might have been other issues at play and facts we don't know about. I, for one, have no clue what type of agreements he might have signed.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
that this was Barry's book? He was asked to edit a book that was all ready underway. I don't care how you want to interpret the law, folks. If he had a case Barry or his estate later on would have persued it. They did not. Please let's stick with the facts, instead of constantly trying to make AA look bad, no matter what.
Barry was pissed at the profits AA was making. Oh well!!
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Once again, if he made substantial editorial changes or arrangements to preexisting material, then he would be the author for purposes of copyright law. However, that in itself is not the end of the story. He seemed to have given AAWS permission to print and sell the book, so there is probably no copyright infringement. The question is whether he was paid what he was told he would be paid for his work. That is a contract question that I do not have enough info to speculate about. I never once said he had a claim. I would need to know more to make an opinion on that.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Everyone I have talked with over years including lawyers and a few judges have all said he did not have any rights to the book. It was not his book. Then you come along Penny and out of the blue you ascertain it is his book and he does have rights. Some of the people I have talked with were around when this issue was happening. He didn't give AA/GSO anything because Barry never owned the book...lol. "Barry gave AA the right to print the book" I don't believe this transaction ever took place.
I am not sure where you are getting this info and who is the "Author" of this info. If it is Barry, when then that is a bit biased.
Just my two cents and change...lol.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Please tell us about how you came to talk to lawyers and judges about this? Usually AA members only talk to them to determine how many AA rituals they need to go to in order to stay out of jail or prison.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Alright then. You obviously have more facts. All I have is the pages AVO posted. Since you have spoken with several lawyers and judges about this, however those conversations came up, I'll defer to your insider knowledge.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Legitimate rights to the book he would have never let them go. Barry was intelligent enough and had the financial wherewithal to peruse this legally. Plus from what I heard he would have had enough support within the inner circle of AA.
I would like to say that I am not against Barry.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Cause, first off nice try. I never said I was in AA for over 20 years. That is the guy you have been abusing for the last 2-3 years. You know Danny Bennison. You are a sick woman, Causy.
Do us all a favor and, "LET IT GO". CauseandEffect all of us are sick and tired of your stupid games.
I am Trisha Kerry, I have said it a 100 times and will keep saying it.
As far as being in AA long enough to have an opinion on this, yeah I can and do have an opinion. Like I told Penny, I was involved in several conversations over my years in AA that involved this subject. My husband is involved in law enforcement and knows many lawyers and a few judges, some who happen to attend AA. I remember maybe 4-5 years ago this was a hot topic in a round table discussion I was involved in. Several members sitting at the table had over 50 years of sobriety and spoke of their knowledge of this particular subject.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Comments
Clara
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 19:47
Permalink
Why shouldn't she have been
Why shouldn't she have been paid, Cause? That was a paid position.
As for LS, I don't think he got any more money from it, and if I wrote it, I would have gifted it. Dr. Bob felt the same way when he wrote the trustees in 1940, refusing royalties for his work. Bill overrode that, though, and Dr. Bob did get paid. I am not incorrect; I said "writings" which isn't limited.
Remember Christopher Stevens when you vote.
JR Harris
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 19:54
Permalink
Royalities for "Living Sober' should have been paid by AAWS
It obviously wasn't. Helen Wynn got paid because she was Bill Wilson's mistress.
If you want this information to disappear off the web, please go to the nearest church basement and pray to the AA god for a miracle. Don't leave until the miracle happens.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Trisha K.
Wed, 05/30/2012 - 11:06
Permalink
Cause, why do you even bother, really.
Every time I read your posts I am convinced more that you really have a very limited firsthand knowledge of AA. The grapevine is not a itty bitty pamphlet, it has many stories and is about 50 pages or so. Living Sober is a small yellow book, no doubt it is much more comprehensive
but it is not this voluminous book. Here is a question Causy, how many pages does Living Sober have? Obviously not as many as you think.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
causeandeffect
Wed, 05/30/2012 - 12:01
Permalink
danny, the last written page
danny, the last written page of Living Sober is page 88. It is the second page of the appendix entitled "A report from a group of physicians in A.A." It's in this appendix where AA admits that members have persuaded members of quit taking their medications.
"A.A. members and many of their physicians have described situations in which depressed patients have been told by A.A.s to throw away the pills, only to have depression return with all it's difficulties, sometimes resulting in suicide."
After that pages 89-92 are blank, but numbered, apparently for notes. The grapevine is a collection of short articles by many different authors. Any other questions?
Troll free AA critical forum
http://www.expaa.org/
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
Trisha K.
Wed, 05/30/2012 - 17:43
Permalink
Bravo Causy, I could have googled it also.
I chose to try and remember. I have the book Living Sober, but I have it packed away so where. I have been trying to locate it.
I have never argued that there are people in AA giving out advice concerning medication. It has always been my position that this is reckless and totally irresponsible. I have said it more than once during a meeting that I felt it isn't responsible to give advice to someone taking medication prescribed by a doctor.
Now I will say this I witnessed a good friend of mine, who is in AA, have an adverse reaction when prescribed Lithium. I was instrumental in helping this friend get off that drug.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
becket
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 10:49
Permalink
Did Barry Leach strike a deal
Did Barry Leach strike a deal for $4,000? Or was he working open-ended, on good faith? Either way it looks like he screwed himself.
“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian
causeandeffect
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 19:44
Permalink
That's my girl!
That's my girl! Awesome find Avo. Gawd, what a cold, hard slap in the face for that poor author. Well leave it to AA to continue ripping off its authors. Wow. Just Wow.
Troll free AA critical forum
http://www.expaa.org/
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
Clara
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 19:46
Permalink
As I said, I believe people
As I said, I believe people don't get paid for their submissions.
Remember Christopher Stevens when you vote.
JR Harris
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 19:57
Permalink
Bill Wilson made sure Helen Wynn got paid for her submissions
Don't "think" Clara, it is against the scripture of Bill Wilson.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
becket
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 23:38
Permalink
I bet if you really try hard,
I bet if you really try hard, JR Harris, you can come up with a comment that has substance and is not begging for applause. Just try. Just once.
“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.”
― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian
avogadno
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 19:50
Permalink
You got it. I really felt
You got it. I really felt sorry for the man when I read this. Imagine waiting "patiently" as he did for over a decade, wondering when the checks would start coming. He really believed in the Billshit, thought they would honor his claim, and called them out on their so-called principles before personalities.
Pro Empowerment!
Truth about AA: http://orange-papers.org/menu1.html
Expose AA: http://www.expaa.org/
Trisha K.
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 20:27
Permalink
Now lets not get carried away.
As usual we are taking the facts and warping them. Barry it could be said, didn't even write the book all by himself. He was given old drafts, some were unsatisfactory and others were incomplete. He was told to put it all together in a book for $4000.00.
Seems Barry later on didn't like the original deal and wanted to go back to the till for more. Guess what it didn't work as it wouldn't anywhere else. A deal is a deal.
JR and Causy this is why no one except for maybe 5 people here take either one of you seriously. You both are disingenuous with the information you present here.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Clara
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 08:04
Permalink
So he essentially was an
So he essentially was an editor, not author?
Remember Christopher Stevens when you vote.
Trisha K.
Wed, 05/30/2012 - 17:46
Permalink
Exactly.
That is what Barry was for AA.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Trisha K.
Wed, 05/30/2012 - 11:08
Permalink
Cause do us a favor and don't put Barry in the same circumstance
you find yourself in on a regular bases, being a victim.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
causeandeffect
Wed, 05/30/2012 - 12:06
Permalink
Let me help you out here. He
Let me help you out here. He was a victim. I am not.
Troll free AA critical forum
http://www.expaa.org/
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
disclosure
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 20:12
Permalink
copyright
Here is my understanding based on my experience.
If I was paid a salary or lump sum without a contract to create a book then the copyright belongs to my employer.
If I created a book on my own accord without payment or contract then the copyright is mine, even without formally registering the work with Library of Congress and paying the small fee. The formal registration of copyright with Library of Congress is a formality that provides additional protection. My guess is that since he accepted payment and did not copyright the work or have a contract no lawyer will take the case.
That is my understanding of the law based on the copyrights I have filed.
The judge is the judge of the law while the jurry is the judge of the evidence.
My guess is that the evidence is a cashed check for $4000 and some testimony.
Pennywise
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 22:57
Permalink
It depends on whether you are
It depends on whether you are an independent contractor or an employee. If you are an employee, the copyright belongs to your employer if the work was created within the scope of your employment (unless there is a contract stating otherwise). If you are an independent contractor, the copyright belongs to you unless you signed a work made for hire contract (and the work falls within one of several categories). At least that is how it is under the 1976 Copyright Act. I'm not sure what the law was before then.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
JR Harris
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 23:03
Permalink
It looks like "Living Sober" was never "conference approved"
They never discussed it at the conference until these letters were sent if I am reading it right.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Pennywise
Sun, 05/27/2012 - 23:28
Permalink
Here is an overview:
Here is an overview (again, this is post 1976 law):
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
disclosure
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 07:56
Permalink
If that be the case...
If that be the case Penny, then a lawyer could slam dunk this for royaltyies plus a percentage of profits and damages. This guy could have a chunk of prudent reserve coming....
Clara
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 08:05
Permalink
But did he write it or did he
But did he write it or did he serve as editor?
Remember Christopher Stevens when you vote.
Pennywise
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 08:20
Permalink
Well, I think he's dead.
Well, I think he's dead. Plus the work was written before the 1976 Copyright Act, and I don't know what the law was back then. Also, although he might have had initial ownership, there might be other legal questions to answer such as whether he transfered ownership of the copyright or granted AAWS a license to use the copyright.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Pennywise
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 09:03
Permalink
From what I gather, he gave
From what I gather, he gave AAWS permission to print and sell the book. He just didn't get paid what he thought he would. Thus, at first blush, this looks more like a breach of contract case than a copyright infringement case, although there might be some overlap.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Trisha K.
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 10:30
Permalink
I don't know where you are getting your information...lol
Clara is right, this guy Barry did not write the book, he more or less edited what was given to him at the start. The foundation for the book was already written pretty much. This is why he never got more then $4000.00. Now later on he saw the popularity for the book and tried to pull some BS to get more money. That is the slam dunk and trust me his estate is never getting anything.
In round table discussion t/o America this conversation has been discussed ad-nausea, people were on both sides of the discussion. Barry did not write the book, he edited a draft that was already written and made it better. So the idea was not his, the book did not originate from him.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
JR Harris
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 10:38
Permalink
Barry Leach got the original AA monolith manuscript
His estate sold it a Sotheby's for about 1.4 million. I think it is called "payback" for screwing him on Living Sober. The second time the original monolith manuscript was sold Hazelden bought it for just a little under 1 million. The Holy Grail of the AA movement went to a provider of Rehab, not the fellowship.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Trisha K.
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 10:53
Permalink
and how did he get the original manuscript? It wasn't payback.
Do you know how he ended up with it? Someone already said it, his close relationship with a person important to AA's beginning. I'll tell ya, Lois was instrumental in Barry receiving the manuscript.
Nobody screwed anybody and if Barry was still here, he would tell you as much. You are making this shit up because as usual you find sensationalism better reading then the truth.
Barry was not given royalties because the idea for the book and the content did not originate from him. Plain and simple, he was a glorified editor. Should they have made a concession, no, absolutely not, then every editor would have been seeking ownership.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Clara
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 11:04
Permalink
Wonder how much his estate
Wonder how much his estate paid in taxes on that money?
Remember Christopher Stevens when you vote.
avogadno
Thu, 05/31/2012 - 05:57
Permalink
JR, are you saying that
JR, are you saying that Hazelden (a non profit orgranization) paid almost a million dollars for a book?
Pro Empowerment!
Truth about AA: http://orange-papers.org/menu1.html
Expose AA: http://www.expaa.org/
JR Harris
Thu, 05/31/2012 - 06:11
Permalink
Actually it was bought by an "entrepreneur" and "donated"
http://www.aaholygrail.com/
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Pennywise
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 10:53
Permalink
No clue on that. I didn't
Trisha said:
Clara is right, this guy Barry did not write the book, he more or less edited what was given to him at the start. The foundation for the book was already written pretty much. This is why he never got more then $4000.00. Now later on he saw the popularity for the book and tried to pull some BS to get more money. That is the slam dunk and trust me his estate is never getting anything. In round table discussion t/o America this conversation has been discussed ad-nausea, people were on both sides of the discussion. Barry did not write the book, he edited a draft that was already written and made it better. So the idea was not his, the book did not originate from him.
Pennywise says:
No clue whether he has a case. I didn't say one way or the other whether he or his estate would prevail. However, if he compiled preexisting material in a way that as a whole constitutes an original work, then he would have a copyright.
As § 103 of the Copyright Act of 1976 states:
§ 101 of the Copyright Act defines a compilation as:
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Trisha K.
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 11:02
Permalink
Penny I would agree with you if it originated from him.
Lets say all the previous work handed to Barry, was edited and Barry realized that the entire content and format was junk and he declared he was starting over. Then I would say that even though the previous work influenced his work going forward, the content of the work was Barry's.
But this isn't how it happened, he accepted the content and improved upon it, therefore the original idea stayed intact. I have been involved in many conversations about this situation and they all end the same. Barry was a close associate and friend and because of that he truly felt he deserved more when the book took off, the book was a hit. Those people he was so close to were not there anymore, so the decision was based solely on business. Which if you look hard enough you will see he did not get screwed in a business sense.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Pennywise
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 11:24
Permalink
Trisha, it does not matter
Trisha, it does not matter what YOU say. It matter what the LAW says.
You said: "he accepted the content and improved upon it, therefore the original idea stayed intact.
The Copyright Act says:
"The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works" (§ 103(a));
and that
"[a] work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications,which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a 'derivative work'." (§ 101)
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Clara
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 11:23
Permalink
Could be how peope justified
Could be how peope justified the changes they made in the BB and could print it. If something is changed 10%, that can be considered a new work. If the BB weren't being changed, I wonder if there would have been any suits.
Remember Christopher Stevens when you vote.
btnben
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 11:31
Permalink
Clara - Why can't you understand
THE COPYRIGHT HAD RUN OUT.
God damn it, get me a whiskey
Bill W, Deathbed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?source=patrick.net&v=Sdn3O6aaMNc
Clara
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 17:21
Permalink
I do understand that, Ben.
I do understand that, Ben.
Remember Christopher Stevens when you vote.
Pennywise
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 12:26
Permalink
Of course they would have
Of course they would have sued. The changes had nothing to do with it. Heck, I'm sure they would have authorized the changes in exchange for enough $$.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Trisha K.
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 13:40
Permalink
....
.....
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Pennywise
Mon, 05/28/2012 - 13:47
Permalink
I have no idea whether he
I have no idea whether he even sued. Like I said, he seemingly gave AAWS permission to print and sell the book, so it appears more like a contract dispute over payment than it does a copyright suit over infringement. I think you might be wrong that he failed to meet the requirements for authorship. In short, the question is likley not whether he was the author, but rather, whether AAWS breached a contract agreement over its use of the work he (probably) authored. Of course, there might have been other issues at play and facts we don't know about. I, for one, have no clue what type of agreements he might have signed.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Trisha K.
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 07:18
Permalink
Wow, how did we get to the conclusion....
that this was Barry's book? He was asked to edit a book that was all ready underway. I don't care how you want to interpret the law, folks. If he had a case Barry or his estate later on would have persued it. They did not. Please let's stick with the facts, instead of constantly trying to make AA look bad, no matter what.
Barry was pissed at the profits AA was making. Oh well!!
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Pennywise
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 13:10
Permalink
Once again, if he made
Once again, if he made substantial editorial changes or arrangements to preexisting material, then he would be the author for purposes of copyright law. However, that in itself is not the end of the story. He seemed to have given AAWS permission to print and sell the book, so there is probably no copyright infringement. The question is whether he was paid what he was told he would be paid for his work. That is a contract question that I do not have enough info to speculate about. I never once said he had a claim. I would need to know more to make an opinion on that.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Trisha K.
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 18:42
Permalink
You seem to think this was his book.
There is no once again, you seem to not get it.
Everyone I have talked with over years including lawyers and a few judges have all said he did not have any rights to the book. It was not his book. Then you come along Penny and out of the blue you ascertain it is his book and he does have rights. Some of the people I have talked with were around when this issue was happening. He didn't give AA/GSO anything because Barry never owned the book...lol. "Barry gave AA the right to print the book" I don't believe this transaction ever took place.
I am not sure where you are getting this info and who is the "Author" of this info. If it is Barry, when then that is a bit biased.
Just my two cents and change...lol.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
JR Harris
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 18:47
Permalink
"talked with over years including lawyers and a few judges"
Please tell us about how you came to talk to lawyers and judges about this? Usually AA members only talk to them to determine how many AA rituals they need to go to in order to stay out of jail or prison.
"Tradition 10 - Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public controversy." Please follow orders from the Interchurch Center if you are an AA member and don't comment.
Trisha K.
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 18:50
Permalink
They are AA members, JR.
They have an interest also of the going ons of AA, too.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
Pennywise
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 18:57
Permalink
Alright then. You obviously
Alright then. You obviously have more facts. All I have is the pages AVO posted. Since you have spoken with several lawyers and judges about this, however those conversations came up, I'll defer to your insider knowledge.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Trisha K.
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 19:13
Permalink
All I am saying is if Barry had rights.
Legitimate rights to the book he would have never let them go. Barry was intelligent enough and had the financial wherewithal to peruse this legally. Plus from what I heard he would have had enough support within the inner circle of AA.
I would like to say that I am not against Barry.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
causeandeffect
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 18:53
Permalink
You said yourself that you
You said yourself that you were only in AA for 20 some odd years. You weren't even in AA when this took place.
Troll free AA critical forum
http://www.expaa.org/
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
causeandeffect
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 18:55
Permalink
Sorry, my last post was meant
Sorry, my last post was meant for "Trisha", not you Pennywise. I don't know why it showed up under your post.
Troll free AA critical forum
http://www.expaa.org/
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
Trisha K.
Wed, 05/30/2012 - 17:21
Permalink
Wait a minute, is this supposed to mean something, Causy?
Cause, first off nice try. I never said I was in AA for over 20 years. That is the guy you have been abusing for the last 2-3 years. You know Danny Bennison. You are a sick woman, Causy.
Do us all a favor and, "LET IT GO". CauseandEffect all of us are sick and tired of your stupid games.
I am Trisha Kerry, I have said it a 100 times and will keep saying it.
As far as being in AA long enough to have an opinion on this, yeah I can and do have an opinion. Like I told Penny, I was involved in several conversations over my years in AA that involved this subject. My husband is involved in law enforcement and knows many lawyers and a few judges, some who happen to attend AA. I remember maybe 4-5 years ago this was a hot topic in a round table discussion I was involved in. Several members sitting at the table had over 50 years of sobriety and spoke of their knowledge of this particular subject.
“The more I traveled the more I realized that fear makes strangers of people who should be friends.”
Shirley MacLaine
SandyB
Tue, 05/29/2012 - 20:14
Permalink
Danny
can you at least try to make your lies believable?
Thanks in advance
Pages