> a) I tend to agree with the wikisource discussion that the > minor changes in the 1981 text are not substantial enough > to warrant a new copyright (especially since many of them > apparently are simply reversions to the original manuscript).
I'm hardly an authoritative source, but I recall a conversation a few years ago with the Church's copyright department that said essentially the same thing as the Wikisource quote about the Book of Mormon: that the text was in the public domain, but the 1981 chapter headings, footnotes and other study aids were in copyright. That particular conversation never mentioned the D&C or the Pearl of Great Price at all, though. Off topic: You know you've been reading too many Unix-related emails when you inadvertently type "Perl of Great Price", as I just did a moment ago :) -------------------- BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
