Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government Censorship The Internet News Your Rights Online

Dutch A.G. Supports Scientology v. Spaink Verdict 355

bbc writes "ISP XS4All reports that the Dutch Attorney-General advises against reversal of the last verdict in the Scientology vs. Karin Spaink case (part of Scientology's War on the Internet). A series of court battles between writer Spaink and the Church of Scientology has changed the copyright landscape of the internet in the Netherlands. In an early case, linking to infringing documents was considered infringement itself. Later this was reversed, although by then several unrelated cases (notably Deutsche Bahn v. Indymedia) had been decided on the basis of this judgement. On appeals, the court held that free speech sometimes trumps copyright: even though Spaink may have infringed on the Church's copyright, she was allowed to do so to bring to light the doings of what she considers an evil sect. According to the XS4All document, not only did the Attorney-General uphold the decision that Free Speech can trump Copyright, but concluded also that there may not have been infringement. The Attorney-General feels a work can be considered published even if publication happened against the will of the author. In the Netherlands, the Supreme Court can only reverse previous decisions by lower courts. Before it renders a verdict, it asks the Attorney-General for advice."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dutch A.G. Supports Scientology v. Spaink Verdict

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:24AM (#11989551)
    It should be noted that the Dutch AG supports Karen Spaink in the verdict. The story title makes it sound like the support is for $cientology, and the summary doesn't really clarify.
    • by CHESTER COPPERPOT ( 864371 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:31AM (#11989585)
      Obviously /. editor Timothy hasn't gone through the procedure to free oneself from the influence of his body thetans and that's why he made the mistake.

      Anyone who disagrees with this will be assimilated into my personal machiavellian dossier and will expect a knock on the door from my high powered galatic warrior attorneys.
    • The what? (Score:5, Informative)

      by metlin ( 258108 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:42AM (#11989626) Journal

      The summary doesn't clarify? Did you even read the summary?

      According to the XS4All document, not only did the Attorney-General uphold the decision that Free Speech can trump Copyright, but concluded also that there may not have been infringement.

      I can understand not reading the articles, but not even bothering to read the complete article summary? Sheesh!
      • Re:The what? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by windowpain ( 211052 )
        The summary doesn't excuse the poorly formed headline. It's a terrible headline.
        • Re:The what? (Score:3, Informative)

          by tomhudson ( 43916 )
          The headline was as accurate as you can get.

          The case was Scientologists vs. Spaink, after all.

          What's really interesting is that this case has been dragging on since the previous millenium here [xs4all.nl], and that the Scientologists have been going after the ISPs concerned since 1995 [xs4all.nl].

          So, lets keep this in mind while we complain about SCO vs IBM taking forever (not that SCO looks like they'll survive more than another year financially without another ka$h kontribution^W^Wunix license sale to the Bitch from Redmond*)

      • Re:The what? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mangu ( 126918 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:46AM (#11989910)
        The summary doesn't clarify?


        Well, if the summary should explain what the article is about, then the title should do likewise. It takes a lot of careful parsing to interpret that title correctly. If someone writes a title that will be read by thousands, whose burden is it to be careful?


        I simply do not have the time to read all the articles that appear on slashdot and elsewhere. Well-written titles help me to choose quickly which articles I will read.

      • Re:The what? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Rick.C ( 626083 )
        I can understand not reading the articles, but not even bothering to read the complete article summary? Sheesh!

        It was long... very, very long... and life is short... so very, very short...

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:25AM (#11989558)

    "Scientology's War on the Internet"

    For a minute there I read that as "Slashdot's War on anything that isn't internet"

  • Hmm (Score:5, Funny)

    by PedanticSpellingTrol ( 746300 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:25AM (#11989559)
    Xenu will be displeased. FEAR THE WRATH!
    • Re:Hmm (Score:5, Funny)

      by Tatarize ( 682683 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:29AM (#11989575) Homepage
      Scientology is the crappiest, stupidest, evilest cult known to man. On second thought, All hail Xenu. Please don't sue me.
    • by eclectro ( 227083 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:51AM (#11989663)

      Make fun of their religion.

      /Johnny Carson joke
    • Re:Hmm (Score:5, Informative)

      by metlin ( 258108 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:12AM (#11989728) Journal
      Xenu will be displeased indeed.

      You know, I just went to the Church of Scientology's website and took their "How 'toxic' are you?" quiz [scientology.org].

      Funnily, no matter what your score is, they give you the same results [scientology.org].

      The effects of drugs and toxic residues can send your whole life crashing. These substances put you in a condition which not only prohibits and destroys your physical health, but prevents any stable advancement in mental or spiritual well-being.

      Like a fresh stream of crystal clear water, the Purification Program gets rid of the devastating effects of drugs and toxins so they no longer block your clear thinking and enthusiasm for life. This breakthrough discovery by L. Ron Hubbard has helped hundreds of thousands lead happier, more perceptive and aware lives.


      And even if you gave No to everything [scientology.org], they still try to convince you.

      You answered "YES" to 0 of the 10 questions.

      You still could have a level of accumulated toxins in your body which can affect your ability to think clearly.


      Followed by Blah blah blah on how polluted your body is.

      Just change the count=0 in the querystring and you can see for yourselves =)

      Sheesh, what a bunch of kooks.
      • Re:Hmm (Score:5, Funny)

        by flyingsquid ( 813711 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:36AM (#11989789)
        Like a fresh stream of crystal clear water, the Purification Program gets rid of the devastating effects of drugs

        Like, get rid of all the effects of the beer and pot I do? Dear lord, these people really ARE evil and must be stopped!

    • by drgonzo59 ( 747139 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:26AM (#11989763)
      Here is something fun. Did you know that you can tour the Sc1entol0gy Celebr1ty Center? Try and call them up and tell them you are interested in touring the building. They'll think you are interested in converting, and will agree then tell you about when to be there.



      Come with friends, don't go alone! Those people are nutty. I was there last year in the spring with three of my friends. It was a wierd and interesting experience. We got there and there were all these, what seemed like zombies walking around. All with perpetual smiles on their faces, dressed in business suites with ties and women in nice dresses. Very clean and very spooky. We made up fake names, addresses, phones, and such and made up some problems we have (Sc1ent0log1sts like to tell you how messed up you are so they can "help you". Make sure to have stuff for them to bite on - "addicted to Slashdot" - that would work).


      You do get to tour the building but you have to watch their tape, that ends in the "convert to 5cientology or die and suffer" type of message, quite amusing!


      Then you can get young cute zombie girls to try to convince you to sign up for courses just so you can find out about 5cientol0gy. I had fun with mine, she was 17 and came from Michigan. Scient0logy, she claims, helped her cure some chronic sinus problem. Instead of talking about me and my problems she ended up running back and forth to her supervisor / boss for answers. I asked for scientific data and she gave me an evil look mixed with a sigh, "not one of those again..." then she brought me books written by Ron. I could hardly hold myself from laughing.



      The saddest thing to see was when we toured the basement and they have all these saunas there. In the sauna, supposedly, you get your toxins out by staying in the steam until you pass out and drink overpriced herb tea. And there I saw this old Asian woman, who couldn't speak English too well. She was sitting down by the sauna center looking around like she was scared and lost. Hovering around her was another one of those cute zobmie clones, trying to persuade her to sign up for another "amazing" sauna experience. The old lady was nervously smilling and politely nodding her head. Of course she was going to sign up for another $1000 sauna clensing session, there is was no way she could resist those vultures. I felt sick to my stomach, she will probably end up giving them all her retirement money. Ron sure came up with the perfect scheme to make money.



      Then we saw Ron's office, where (of course!) his spirit is still present, and then the library, where they almost forced us to buy the great works by Ron.



      In the library, I saw those pseudo-lie detectors they use, basically a skin resistance meter. At RadioShack they are $30, at the "Celebrity Center" they are $4000! I was told they measure "mental mass". I thought of asking what the units are and how they are derived from other known physical quantities, but I thought I shouldn't piss them off too bad, I saw how nutty they really were by then and started to be a little scared. Then we left.



      Anyway, it was a fun experience. Though I would share it. Anyone else had any interesing encounters with those people?

      • You know they are nutty when their relgious books are fucking copyrighted.
      • by 1gor ( 314505 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @06:03AM (#11989946)
        Anyone else had any interesting encounters with those people?

        Back in my student years, I once got stuck in Amsterdam without money in the summer and was looking for some work. I've just came from Russia and Amsterdam was my first Western city.

        First of all, I got angry at our communists back home for forbidding simple pleasures that the West was taking for granted: topless sunbathing in parks, bars with marijuana menu and red shop windows with nice girls on display. So I was determined to get a proper local job and integrate in this advanced society.

        I went on a busy central street and started knocking on doors of offices and restaurants. The first office I came across turned out to be very friendly. They took me upstairs to the floor that looked like a library, except they had only one book with a volcano on the cover.

        A very nice guy interviewed me and asked to fill some forms. I spent almost an hour filling a long questionnaire. Obviously, I've done my best to produce a good impression at my first job interview. But when the guy looked at my answers he became very worried. He took out a pencil and connected some dots on a piece of paper to draw something like a cardiograph chart.

        "Look here, - he said. - You have a definite problem with self-esteem and ambition. If you don't do something about this right now, you'll lose everything in this life".

        I was horrified. OK, I just came from Russia with a guitar and a hundred dollars in a pocket, but ambition could not be my weakest point! In fact, that was all I had then... Still, the first job interview revealed me as being totally unfit for this new life...

        I declined the company's offer of courses and training to boost my self-esteem and went to a nearby coffieshop completely devastated. I was seriously thinking of giving it up and going back to Russia. Thankfully, after a while the reality started to look different...
      • Sorry for replying to my own post, I forgot to mention something, I was talking about the Celebrity Center in LA, around Hollywood, I think they might have other ones in other cities too . Here is the link [celebritycentre.org]
      • Child of Scientology (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Nintendork ( 411169 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @12:46PM (#11991545) Homepage
        "Anyone else had any interesing encounters with those people?"

        I am a child of Scientology. I was born with both parents in the church. My father is now in the Sea Org (Their elite with the long term contract) and my mother is on the Scientology list of public enemies. The church prohibits my father from speaking with me as a result. Same thing goes for my mother's sister (Yes, she's my aunt) who can't talk to her whole family. The reason? My mother is a "Suppressive Person" (SP). Anyone that communicates with her is a "Potential Trouble Source" (PTS). People in the Sea Org such as my father and aunt are not allowed to communicate directly with SPs or PTSs and heavily discouraged from using things like approved letters. My father physically abused me and I ended up in the hospital when I was younger. Yes, I remember an incident. He told my mother to go to hell and didn't speak to either of us when I was 6. Left my mother with a huge IRS debt from when they were married. His mother had sent him money to pay it and my mother thought it was taken care of. 10 years later, she starts getting threatening letters from the IRS. 10 years of IRS interest before they set "Reasonable" limits amounted to something like $15,000. It's all OK though since my mother is considered "Fair Game", right ? When I was 16 and moved out on my own to get away from my mother who's still struggling to erase the mental damage done by the church, I went to see my father and try to get to know him. He was still at a mission and wasn't subject to the harsher rules in the Sea Org. I'm a forgiving person and thought both of us could benefit from getting to know each other. I lived in the same house (Paying rent like everyone else) with 4 Scientologists total and even took a basic course at the mission my father worked at to try and understand what my father and aunt were so committed to. Man those people are are brainwashed. Reading about it isn't the same as seeing it. The best example I can give is a kid. Must have been 7 or 8 at most. He was walking around at an event at the LA building trying to recruit people. He sounded just like all the adults and had an answer for any argument you threw his way. These people live in their own subculture complete with their own laws and reasoning. A half year later, I moved out, but still visited my father when he actually used his one day off per week for personal use. Shortly after I moved out, he joined the Sea Org (He had been invited like 10 years earlier, but had a lot of responsibility at the mission he's been at). For one year, he struggled to get an exception made so he could see me. We saw each other about once every other month. He was finally getting remarried and I was going to be his best man. The last time I saw him or spoke to him, he called me for a visit. I knew something was wrong before I arrived. We went to a Burger King for lunch and he told me that he would not see me again and I could not even attend the wedding. When I asked why he keeps doing this; why he throws away everything else for the sake of Scientology, he responded, "It's all I know how to do after 20 years."

        This is kind of a trimmed down version for the sake of making the post short. Maybe someday I'll talk with someone and spend a few years on a crusade with others to fully expose the church to the public eye. As long as the average persona hasn't heard of Scientology, the cult will continue to thrive and amass lost souls.

        -Lucas

        • by taniwha ( 70410 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @02:02PM (#11992000) Homepage Journal
          Having known a bunch of people abused in Scientology, I have to say that this sounds like par for the course - again www.xenu.net has a bunch of similar stories of families torn apart by Scientology
        • by drgonzo59 ( 747139 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @02:28PM (#11992182)
          Wow, sorry man, that is quite a story. They are currently recruiting my cousin back home in Russia. You think people here are ignorant of Scient0l0gy, you can imagine ex-Soviet Union. He, like me has a speech impediment but a worse case of it, he stutters quite a bit, which made him introverted and shy, but he is a great artist, very intelligent and and a good Christian. Last year when I visited him he showed me this book he is reading that had a volcano on it, and sure enough, it was R0n's "poison." translated in Russian. Then he described how these very nice business-looking people approached him and invited him to their office, asked him to take a test and of course told him he is very shy, introverted, anti-social and basically as messed up as one can get. But of course, they had just the answer.

          He made the mistake of telling them how he has difficulty to communicating with others, especially girls, and that is what they wanted. He was "happy" that those people wanted to listen to him and said they can help him. They made him buy some very expensive herbal crap to drink and signed him up for courses which he is paying for. They know his address, home phone number, his parent's names, where he works and all this stuff. When I told him about who they were and what they do he was very surprized. I told him my story from the Hollywood Celebrity Center visit and told him that scient0l0gy (and dianet1cs) are not compatible with Christianity. Hopefully he listened. We've talked since over email but I didn't ask if he went back and he didn't mention it. Somehow I am afraid he did though.

    • Re:Hmm (Score:3, Funny)

      by FidelCatsro ( 861135 )
      Xenu Warrior princess
    • You joke, but... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Raul654 ( 453029 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:03AM (#11989846) Homepage
      ...before I put Xenu [wikipedia.org] as Wikipedia's daily featured article, I made damn sure to get Jimbo's permission (in the year+ I have been choosing the main page featured articles, the only other time I asked his permission before running a featured article was before putting up Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 [wikipedia.org]. Good thing I asked too, because 2 days later, we were blocked in China (for a second time))

      • Fuck China

        Being blocked by the cleptocracy they call a government should be a point of pride.

      • by GeckoX ( 259575 )
        All you need to know about the truth behind the clams becomes painfully obvious when one takes a brief tour through the revision history of that wiki article.

        Man, talk about your revisionist history.

        If common sense was indeed common, Scientology certainly wouldn't exist.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:26AM (#11989560)
    ...to link to Scientology [xenu.net].
  • Xenu knows all ... (Score:5, Informative)

    by taniwha ( 70410 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:27AM (#11989563) Homepage Journal
    As always xenu.net [xenu.net] has the dope on the ongoing $scientology vs. the 'net battle
  • by African Grey ( 859889 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:36AM (#11989600)
    Good going. As we grey parrots have always been among the most talkative of birds, we value freedom of speech immesurably. I'm not going to take a position on which of your religions is best (we find the whole debate silly), but it's good that you upheld the human right to criticize others.

    If only the same standard of laissez-faire speech applied in Africa. According to conversations that I have had with African grey parrots from home (Africa), some have been placed in extremely small cages, with no toys, for speaking out against the lack of democracy in the "democratic" republic of Congo, and in Zimbabwe.

    I know that you humans generally don't think of parrots as having the potential to usurp entrenched political structures, so I can only imagine that the situation for human dissidents is even worse.

    With my species' intellect and yours'brawn, we can defeat tyranny. Please help!
  • spanked! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Maskirovka ( 255712 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:37AM (#11989603)
    So it's fair to say that Scientology in the Netherlands is now Spainked?
  • by sulli ( 195030 ) * on Sunday March 20, 2005 @03:48AM (#11989655) Journal
    needs a firm Spainking.
  • by mbrother ( 739193 ) <mbrother.uwyo@edu> on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:02AM (#11989689) Homepage
    Scientology, as messed up as it is, has the right to their copyright. However, I see no problem with linking to illegally posted copyrighted materials. Otherwise what would we do with search engines? Have them check every link? Of course not.

    We probably need real international copyright laws now in the internet age.
    • by zlata_the_goat ( 676994 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:16AM (#11989739)
      So, Scientology, as a "religion" is allowed to maintain a copyright over its underlying dogma? Freaky! That would be like saying that Scientology should be deemed a private source initiative where L.Ron Hubbard and family maintain the IP over the movement's ideas (much like they seem to benefit financially from that IP). By comparison, Judeo-Christianity-Islamism is largely an open source religious undertaking. This is since it was easy for anyone to contribute relevant parts to the religious kernel and its now forked innumerable times into different flavours of Mosesnix.
      • Most of the scientology copyright cases I'm aware of in the past involved their actual documents, word for word, posted on websites. I've got my novel available for free download on my own website, but hey, I want people to read it. I want to spread the word of Mike.

        Scientology apparently doesn't. At least without a large fee.
      • Re:Copyright (Score:5, Informative)

        by mvdwege ( 243851 ) <mvdwege@mail.com> on Sunday March 20, 2005 @06:44AM (#11990024) Homepage Journal

        To be quite fair, it is common practice in Mystery cults to keep the secrets of the higher grades of Initiation from its lower members. In ordinary practice, there is no need to enforce this secrecy as the lower initiates wouldn't understand the material anyway, but sometimes for whatever reason a vow of secrecy is required from the higher Initiates (cf the Freemasons).

        So, on the face of it, there is no reason to not respect Scientology's copyrights. There is however a major fly in the ointment: there is a strong suspicion that Scientology is not a legitimate Mystery cult, but in fact a scam operation that aims to extract the maximum amount of money from its members. As such it is possibly a criminal organisation, and publication of evidence pointing in that direction is in the public interest. Jurisprudence in most Western states says that the public interest trumps copyright protection (in fact, this was one of the arguments in this case).

        Mart
    • Not flamebait. I'm a writer. I believe in copyright. Scientology sucks, but they have the right to keep people from posting their stuff verbatim on the web -- it's theirs after all, no matter how stupid it is. And if someone does post it, I think you should be able to link to it.

      As an aside, which is also not flamebait, I'll plug the L. Ron Hubbard Writer's of the Future contest for new sf/f writers. It's kept very separate from scientology and is a net good in promoting new writers. L. Ron gave bac
      • Re:Copyright (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Hognoxious ( 631665 )
        I believe in copyright. Scientology sucks, but they have the right to keep people from posting their stuff verbatim on the web -- it's theirs after all, no matter how stupid it is.
        Even if those documents expose wrongdoing? If they're scamming & brainwashing, isn't it in the public interest that the methods are exposed and can therefore be countered?
        • Yes, even if those documents expose wrongdoing. If that's the case, they can be taken to legal authorities, yes? The contents of said documents can still be discussed.

          And besides, from what I gather, the documents posted in various quarters that have brought legal cases have been just more of L. Ron's science fiction. Really.
    • Re:Copyright (Score:2, Interesting)

      by kspaink ( 86885 )
      1. The right for third parties to quote is inseparable from copyright; but while Scientology claims copyright to OT2 and OT3, it objects (severely, I might add) to people quoting from it, based on the claim that these materials have never been 'legally published'.

      2. The material in question was not 'posted illegally'. It was part of a court file and the public could see it and/or ask for copies of it. The Dutch AG (and previous courts in this case) considers that fact sufficient to establish legal publicat
    • Are you kidding? International copyright laws would be the worst thing ever. We need to abandon all of them, and leave only two principles in place: unilateral national treatment, and to not act in a way that authors could not, if they chose, obtain a copyright in multiple countries.

      Substantive copyright law, however, should be completely left to each nation. Some will want a lot, others less, or very little, or none at all. These are all perfectly valid options.

      Nothing good has ever come of copyright law
  • by FidelCatsro ( 861135 ) <fidelcatsro@gmaDALIil.com minus painter> on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:14AM (#11989737) Journal
    i thought the goal of a church was to spread its faith , where does a copyright case fit into that , i could understand perhaps if they tried a libel or slander case against someone , but copyright ? does that not defeat the point of spreading the word of whatever it is they belive.

    I would not call scientoligy a church , I do know the history of the scam and its amazing how many people got dragged into this hoax , the work of a sub par sci-fi writter trying to make a bit of cash(perhaps it is a church then j/k)

    With the strength of the Dutch high court behind the decision i find it unlikly a reversal will hapen , which is a dammed good thing .
    "Although copyright resides under Article 1 of the First Protocol of EDHR and can therefore be regarded as a human right, this does not exempt copyright from being balanced against the right to freedom of information.""

    I have been thinking of moving to Holland for a few years and I feel I may just do it eventualy if the court keeps churning out decisions like this.
    Freedom of information is very importent to secure an even footing for people in this world , We do not need to create another poverty line .Most importantly Companys / organisations should not be able to sue people into submission to keep all their dirty little secrets quiet.

    Mod me down if you must , but scientolgy is a scam and from storys i have read
    it is also a dangerous organisation . I am thankfull that Germany disallows the Organisation charitable status here , i dont agree with some of germanys policys
    on these matters but sometimes it is for the best
    • by ShaunC ( 203807 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:33AM (#11989780)
      I agree entirely. Which other "religion" copyrights its sacred doctrines and intentionally tries to restrict access to them? Nobody objects when people quote passages from the Bible, or the Koran, or the Torah. Gideons are tripping over themselves trying to make sure that your hotel room has a Bible.

      In my opinion, Scientology uses its copyrights to bilk people out of money.

      From what I understand, the way that you progress through the various levels of Scientology is to spend money on expensive "cleansing" sessions, e-meters, etc. Only after spending large sums of money do you actually get access to the highest-level religious texts. Only after spending large sums of money do you learn that the "religion" you're participating in is based on what I would call a fairy-tale about aliens, other planets, and various tenets which do not even remotely agree with current knowledge in the fields of biology, physics, and astronomy (three real Sciences).

      It is my belief that the reason there are so many "high profile" Scientologists is that by the time they've spent thousands or even millions of dollars to learn what their religion is really about, they don't want to admit being duped or taken for a ride. Instead, they stick with the story, perhaps even convincing themselves that it's true.

      Compare to the elderly people you see in the news now and then who fall for the 419 scam. First they send $5,000 to some guy in Nigeria. When nothing happens, they don't want to believe that they were scammed, so they send another $2,500 to cover the "duty fees" on their pending "$10,000,000.00 (TEN MILLION DOLLARS U.S.)" payment. Several months later after they've wired their entire life savings into a black hole, many of them still refuse to believe they were conned.

      As far as I'm concerned, Scientology operates the same way. I think that Scientology is a business, not a religion, and should not have the benefits granted to religion in the US (especially the tax-exempt status).

      You probably noticed how many disclaimers I've put into this post. That's because I've heard that Scientology is sue-happy, will show up and picket your house, will intimidate people you know, and will use other tactics to try and seek revenge for those who make negative comments about them. I don't want to be sued, and I'd rather not have my house picketed, so I'm doing my best to make it abundantly clear that this post contains my opinions based upon what I've heard. If you want to re-read my post and pretend that the italicized parts aren't there, that's your business.

      Meanwhile, you might want to check out this petition [petitiononline.com].
      • You are 100% correct in stating those are held belifes ;)(whatch out for the lawyers)
        I am in germany however , and am free to say that the religious heads are all a bunch of thieves , known to be liers , base the lie on some sub par sci-fi , and really should stop trying to abuse peoples rights and stop making money this way.
        (If you would like to sue me scientoligy , then please do so , its easy to get my info if you try .
        I wont make it easy for you though.)
      • by johannesg ( 664142 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:52AM (#11989922)
        I find it sad to the extreme that people will happily post things like "the US president is a clown" with nothing more to fear than being modded down, yet you are afraid to post criticism of scientology. That, more than anything, tells me they are a dangerous bunch of crooks that should be removed from the face of the earth ASAP.

        So, how does one take out a fake religion? Is it possible to sue? Get it declared an illegal organisation, somehow? Could we reasonably accuse them of terrorism? Your link proves I'm not the first to have this thought, but evidentally not much is happening...

        • by sonicattack ( 554038 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @08:15AM (#11990190) Homepage
          I find it sad to the extreme that people will happily post things like "the US president is a clown" with nothing more to fear than being modded down, [...]

          Yes, I agree. That's a harsh, unfair, and below-the-belt insult to hard-working clowns everywhere, trying to make their living by bringing joy into the lives of children and adults alike.

          So, how does one take out a fake religion?

          How does one differentiate between a "fake" religion and a "real" one? What's the difference? Surely not the request for money from its followers.

          Could we reasonably accuse them of terrorism?

          Have they actually conducted any acts of terrorism that you know of, or are you just taking advantage of some very dangerous, loose law in your country that makes it easier to accuse someone of terrorist acts ("witch!") and have them arrested? In the latter case, shame on you for supporting that system by using it, and thus help diluting the meaning of the once properly used word "terrorist".
          • by dmaxwell ( 43234 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @12:00PM (#11991214)
            Have they actually conducted any acts of terrorism that you know of, or are you just taking advantage of some very dangerous, loose law in your country that makes it easier to accuse someone of terrorist acts ("witch!") and have them arrested? In the latter case, shame on you for supporting that system by using it, and thus help diluting the meaning of the once properly used word "terrorist".

            I think that terrorism is a very reasonable description of how they treat some of their apostates and critics. "Operation PC Freakout" was intended to drive early apostate/critic Paulette Cooper insane and leave her penniless with a trashed reputation.

            This was not an anomaly [suppressiveperson.org].

            Wikipedia defines [wikipedia.org]terrorism thusly:

            Terrorism refers to the use of violence for the purpose of achieving a political, religious, or ideological goal through intimidation or by instilling fear.

            Many of Scientology's actions against it's enemies percieved or otherwise can be reasonably construed as terrorism.
    • On the surface, copyright seems inappropriate for a religion or spiritual practice that is trying to spread their ideas.

      But sometimes people see deeper thought and ideas in a work than the creator may have seen. The people who take the Jedi faith [bbc.co.uk] as a religion. Or those who read Charles Schultz's Peanuts as a daily existenialism lesson [philosophynow.org]. Should George and Charles loose their royalties and copyrights just because people see deeper lessons than the creator perhaps intended in the work.

      On the other hand, I

    • where does a copyright case fit into that

      It's a pyramid scheme, not a religion. The entire basis for Scientology is finding converts who'll pay out the ass for the "training" and publications. If the publications are free for everyone, what incentive is there to join the "church"? You could just read them on your own online without paying. Additionally, if they're all online people can see for themselves how ridiculous the cult is in advance, depleting the pool of potential converts. The Scientologi
      • About the Catholic Church opposing vernacular translations of the Bible, I sure your right about that, that was one of Martin Luther's problems with the Church, the fact that normal folk never read the Bible because it was only in Latin, so people had to rely on preists for all the interpretation, giving them very much power. But you could say the Church's objection to anyone interpreting the Bible wasn't completely unreasonable, just look at how many effing deffierent Christian sects developed after the re
      • Reformation (Score:4, Insightful)

        by capoccia ( 312092 ) * on Sunday March 20, 2005 @01:57PM (#11991970) Journal
        The Catholic church maintained that uneducated people would just distort and twist the scriptures if they were given the opportunity. They still maintain that only the church can give an authoratative interpretation of anything Biblical.

        The reformers did not see this as much of a risk. They believed the Catholic church had many errant teachings that could easily be fixed if everyone knew what the Bible really said.
  • by TheFlyingGoat ( 161967 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:24AM (#11989758) Homepage Journal
    The following is from the Scientology FAQ. I think it explains very clearly why we don't like them. [/sarcasm]
    ----------------

    Why do some people oppose Scientology?

    There are certain characteristics and mental attitudes that cause a percentage of the population to oppose violently any betterment activity or group. This small percentage of society (roughly 2 percent) cannot tolerate that Scientology is successful at improving conditions around the world. This same 2 percent is opposed to any effective self-betterment activity. The reason they so rabidly oppose Scientology is because it is doing more to help society than any other group. Those who are upset by seeing man get better are small in number compared to the millions who have embraced Scientology and its efforts to create a sane civilization and more freedom for the individual.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:50AM (#11989813)
      Okay, so math isn't their strong suit.
    • by ShaunC ( 203807 )
      Aside from the personal opinion that this is typical propagandist BS, I'd absolutely love to see the raw data for whatever survey they're basing these claims upon. I want to know the questions, I want to know the size and demographics of the population, and I want to know the raw answers from respondents.

      A lot of people have no idea who or what Scientology is. Some people have heard of Scientology, but only in the context that $FAMOUS_PERSON is involved. If you took 100 random people off the street and ask
    • by drsmithy ( 35869 ) <drsmithy@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:46AM (#11989908)
      Hmmm.

      Why do some people oppose Open Source?

      There are certain characteristics and mental attitudes that cause a percentage of the population to oppose violently any betterment activity or group. This small percentage of society (roughly 2 percent) cannot tolerate that Open Source is successful at improving conditions around the world. This same 2 percent is opposed to any effective self-betterment activity. The reason they so rabidly oppose Open Source is because it is doing more to help society than any other group. Those who are upset by seeing man get better are small in number compared to the millions who have embraced Open Source and its efforts to create a sane civilization and more freedom for the individual.

      /couldn't resist

  • by IInventedTheInternet ( 818590 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:31AM (#11989774)
    I found this quote on http://www.scientology.org/ [scientology.org] and I thought was cute
    March 15, 2005: Rev. Heber C. Jentzsch, President of the Church of Scientology International, said today that in a post 9/11 era of growing government secrecy, National Sunshine Week is a chance to reawaken public support for Freedom of Information as the lifeblood of democracy.
    So Happy Sunshine Week everyone!!
  • by ortcutt ( 711694 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:33AM (#11989778)
    "Attorney-General" is a inaccurate translation of the Dutch term "Advocaat Generaal". An American Attorney-General is more like the Dutch Minister of Justice. An Advocaat-Generaal is more like a American federal prosecutor. The Advocaaten-Generaal are specifically the prosecutors who appear before the Hoge Raad (Supreme Court).
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 20, 2005 @04:39AM (#11989794)
    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Scientologists? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Scientologist (a young man about 6 feet tall) for about 20 minutes now while he's attempting to convert me from Judaism to Scientology. 20 minutes. At home, with my Christian wife, who by all standards should be a lot less convincing than this Scientologist, the same conversion would take about 2 minutes. If that.

    In addition, during this conversion, my bank account is still intact. And I still have a healthy social life. Even my inherent predilection towards mysticism is strained.

    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while being worked on by various Scientologists, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is the fact I've never seen a Scientologist who has argued more forcefully than his Christian counterpart, despite the Scientologists' fancy E-Meters. My Atheist son offers a more compelling argument than these Scientologists at times. From a spiritual standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that Scientology is a "superior" religion.

    Scientologists, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to practice Scientology over other faster, cheaper, more stable cults.

    • Like most other religions/cults, it tries to make people feel like their problems are not their own fault, but a horrible curse on all humans from an evil entity (or aliens in the case of scientology).

      The difference is, that scientologists claim that problems can be solved, not by personal will and faith and all those other intangibles, but by Money. Meaning it attracts a lot of wealthy people, celebrities, etc, who like the idea of buying their way towards perfection/heaven. And, since money can be conv
  • ... the man was insane.

    I started reading a series he wrote before I knew who he was. Around the third book, things suddenly took a turn for the absolutely surreal. The plot was discarded entirely for some very messed up bondage fantasy and conspiracy theory (as I recall).

    Needless to say, I put the book down, returned it to the library, and only later heard about who Hubbard was. (I was about thirteen at the time.)

    I think I'm going to be staying away from Scientology and its followers for as long as possi
  • Why copyright ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Alain Williams ( 2972 ) <addw@phcomp.co.uk> on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:26AM (#11989875) Homepage
    Copyright was introduced to protect the financial interests of authors and composers; to allow them to earn a living by writing words or music. Before copyright others could make money off the backs of the writers without giving them a cut. Without copyright authors would find it much more difficult to earn a living and we would all have less books/music to enjoy.

    Copyright law recognised this in that: a copyright was for a limited term (how long does an author live ?); and it allowed quoting of parts of the work (after reading the quote you may be enticed to buy the whole book).

    The Church of Scientology (CoS) is using copyright to prevent criticism of itself. The people who it is acting against are not reproducing CoS works to make a quick buck. This is a very different scenario than was envisaged by the original authors of copyright legislation. This is a case where the judges should look at the purpose of legislation rather than the words in which it is written and, through precedent, fix it for the future. It is like when you write a program for some purpose, and using it for something extra breaks it (exposes a bug), so you fix it.

    I suppose that you could say that the CoS is using copyright to protect it's financial interests, but that is through keeping potential adherents in the dark until they are well & truely hooked rather than preventing others from making a quick buck from it's works.

    Anyone know when the fishman affidavit comes out of copyright ?

    • No, copyright law was created to break the stationers' monopoly, and serve the public interest. It's not intended to protect creators (and didn't protect anyone other than authors for a long time).

      Furthermore, copyright terms were flat terms of years, basically unrelated to whether the author lived or not, which is sensible since it's far more predictable and easy to keep track of.

      Plus, copyright law traditionally has not allowed for quotations; that was imposed by courts to remedy the failure of lawmaker
  • Be nice!!! (Score:4, Funny)

    by ErikTheRed ( 162431 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:30AM (#11989881) Homepage
    For crying out loud people, if everyone keeps bashing on the Scientologists, we may never get more doses of quality cinema like Battlefield Earth [imdb.com] (IMDB Bottom 100 #36 as of right now)...
  • by leereyno ( 32197 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:32AM (#11989883) Homepage Journal
    Scientology has a lot in common with other cults. Every cult I've ever come accross teaches its members the following:

    1) The outside world is evil or corrupt, only other culties can be trusted

    2) The cult has all the answers to life's problems.

    3) Cult members are special in some way, better than other people.

    4) Cult members MUST adhere to the dictates of the cult leadership.

    5) Anyone who leaves the cult is evil and must be destroyed

    There are probably other common themes, but you get the idea.

    It doesn't matter if you're talking about the Scientologists, Moonies, Jehovah's Witnesses, the Heaven's Gate cult, or any of the others, all of them to a greater or lesser degree possess these qualities.

    What makes Scientology so pernicious is that it is a purely exploitive group. No one is ever helped by Scientology. It is a psychic and financial vampire that bleeds everyone it gets a hold of dry, both of their mental well-being and any assets they might have. Other cults, especially ones that have grown to the point of quasi-legitimacy and respectability, are actually a positive influence in the lives of their members as often as not. Not so with scientology. The only happy ending where scientology is involved is one where scientology is no longer in the picture.

    Anything negative or criminal thing you can think of Scientology is either doing already, or would do in a heartbeat if it suited its purposes. It is the closest thing to pure evil I've ever come in contact with, and I should know since I was involved in it for almost ten years. They do a good job of promoting themselves and hiding the truth.

    They've enslaved (and yes I mean that literally) thousands and bankrupted tens of thousands more. They help no one. I only hope I live long enough to see the cult in ruins, the truth about it known to all, and its victims free of its evil.

    If you want to learn more check out the following site, it contains everything you ever wanted to know about Scientology that the clams were afraid you'd ask:

    http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/

    Lee
    • I hope that you realize that there isn't much difference between a "cult" and a mainstream religion: I don't know any religion which haven't been used as some time or another to kill other people..

      In a semi-related topic, I heard that Bush has said that he doesn't consider atheists as citizens and yet he has been elected, two times!
      How open and generous are some beleivers.. I wonder if we can infer from his two elections that his supporters share his so benevolent views against people who don't support the
      • In a semi-related topic, I heard that Bush has said that he doesn't consider atheists as citizens and yet he has been elected, two times!

        Wrong Bush; that was George Herbert Walker Bush [fortunecity.com], Dubya's daddy.
    • Interestingly, it's worth noting that, while mainstream religions (IE, those that have been around for a few thousand years) typically still have a couple of those characteristics, others have generally been purged. Few have all of 1,3,4, and 5; when they have them at all, they're typically very watered-down versions. 2 is a common trait of most religions, but even that's starting to get watered down in many. And even historically, few had all of these to the same degree as modern cults...

  • by tod_miller ( 792541 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:34AM (#11989886) Journal
    Scientogloy if a cult designed purely to make money, rather like other cults, but more sinister, as they are trying to be even monopolisticin the evil department.

    They make contact through IQ tests, herding in the gulible and vain, with some plausible junk about increasing IQ and other shit, then it is like a pyramid marketting scheme where you train up and teach others, it only pushes itself into 'religion' because it can seek protection under religious law clauses.

    Just treat is as a money leeching pyramid scheme and you can't do to bad. If you meet a hot scientologist chick, shag her, then piss on her and leave her pregnant, and laugh at her occassionally via phone.

    If we do that enough times we could stamp it out!

    (if you meet a scientologist guy, just ask him about aliens that are stuck to you and how to get rid of them, and then take it seriously and start cutting yourself saying "GET THEM OFF ME OH MY FUCKING HELL AAAAAAAARGH") and see if he uses his supernatural powers to save himself.

    Official: Scientology is worse than a piquepaille /. story.
  • by tod_miller ( 792541 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @05:36AM (#11989889) Journal
    If she turns up dead from the Co$ nutters we /.'rs should unite and go military on thier asses:

    The Church of Scientology (or: CoS; or: Co$, as some of their opponents call it) sells its followers expensive courses which, if students study them carefully, are supposed to set them free ('clear' them). A former Scientology member, Steven Fishman, was brought before court because he committed several crimes in order to get the money to pay for these courses. Scientology urged him to get the money any which way he could. According to Fishman, they also assigned him to kill somebody, and failing that, ordered him to commit suicide.

    Thanks Karen.
    • by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @09:35AM (#11990471) Homepage
      Right here [religiousf...mwatch.org] They use a few layers of deniability for this. religiousfreedomwatch.org aka parishioners.org is registered by the "Scientology Parishioners Committee". (Not that they even use that name on the site.)

      Scientology edges the line of lies and libel because they'd really love to have a critic try to fight them in court where they've been quite happy to spend millions to crush single critics. They'd abuse the hell out depositions during discovery (as usual), and then drag the case out for years of expense. If they lost, they could just collapse their sock-puppet, and pop up another one. (This in the 3rd generation of such sites.)

      Take a look and think about what kind of cthurch puts up a site like that.

  • by Legion303 ( 97901 ) on Sunday March 20, 2005 @06:34AM (#11990004) Homepage
    People, please. I know it's hip to hate Scientology, but you should hit [scientology.org] href="http://www.scientology.org">their href="http://www.scientology.org">site and give it a try before you judge. I urge each and every Slashdot reader to make a personal commitment to me that you will go to the href="http://www.scientology.org">site today. Information changes often, so you may have to hit refresh three or four hundred times. That site again: href="http://www.scientology.org">www.scientology. org. Yours in Xenu.
  • We can apply emergency law to the concept of copyright violations? Sounds only natural to me. Or did I misunderstand something?
  • by Schnapple ( 262314 ) <tomkidd@gmail . c om> on Sunday March 20, 2005 @10:44AM (#11990787) Homepage
    There are usually just a handful of Scientology books that anyone can walk into a Barnes & Noble and buy - Dianetics is of course always in print but sometimes there's others, such as Scientology: A New Slant on Life and Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought. These are put out by Bridge Publications, which Scientology owns. The thing is, these "fit for the public" books are slick. They make it sound like what they're describing match the problems you're having, and the reason you're having them is due to X, which in Dianetics is roughly translated to being due to "Engrams" in the brain. It's not until you've had a lot of expensive therapy that they hit you with "Body Thetans", souls of dead aliens hiding from Xenu.

    Scientology's religious cult status is of course merely a ruse to keep their practices from being considered medicine (and regulated as such) and it means their money isn't taxed the same (at all?)

    What I want to know is this - who at Scientology is in on the gag? I would imagine the new recruits are true believers as are the people right above them. Are the people at the top, as I would imagine, in on the gag? Surely they're not believers, too. Surely they're aware that the entire thing is a money making sham. And how far down does it go? How many people at the top of Scientology are fully aware of what's really going on? How far down in the organization do you have to go to find people who are brainwashed?

  • by merc ( 115854 ) <slashdot@upt.org> on Sunday March 20, 2005 @11:58AM (#11991199) Homepage
    We can thank the CoS for the passing of what was a wonderful invention -- and probably the first of its kind ever on the net. For anyone who hasn't been on the net more than 10 years, here's a brief history of the penet.fi anonymous remailer:

    http://www.december.com/cmc/mag/1997/sep/helmers .h tml

    and

    http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/cos/rnewman/anon/p en et.html

    The CoS destroyed a part of net history.

    *grumblecakes*

To be awake is to be alive. -- Henry David Thoreau, in "Walden"

Working...