Just In Time For Valentine’s Day… (?)
Just imagine…
The Majesty Orchestra and Soloist Ron Hamilton
When You’re In Love… ‘Till There Was You… My Funny Valentine…. This Valentine’s Day, curl up by the fire, pop open some sparkling cider and warm your heart with these lush orchestral arrangements of timeless classics. Featuring the signature sounds of Ron Hamilton, this brand new recording is sure to become a romantic favorite that you’ll play again and again.
Selections include: ‘Till There Was You • When You’re In Love • Love Lifted Me • In The Garden • Wonderful Peace • Someone To Watch Over Me • Beautiful Dreamer • Amazing Love • O Love That Will Not Let Me Go • Somebody Stole My Heart Away • Unforgettable • and many more!
———
ADDITION: Just to be clear, I don’t think Ron Hamilton or Majesty Music would ever release such an album (nor am I suggesting they do). It would be inappropriate, and mix themes that just ought not be mixed.
What I am trying to do with this (admittedly ridiculous) post is help those of you who seem to struggle with exactly what I find wrong with the Renfrow Christmas album see the absurdity I see when I look at the selections.
Perfect.
I have a similar album by Guy and Ralna from the Lawrence Welk Show.
Can you ever just let it go? I am the first to say that the BJ crowd has lived by the sword in this area and it is appropriate that they reap some of their own medicine. But do you realize how bitter and petty you sound when you harp on silly issues?
There is nothing spiritual about your attacks on other men just because they have a different preference on music than you do. You, the Remonstrans guy, and the other three in your crowd continue to substitute your overzealous war on relevant music for the Biblical mandates regarding how to treat other Christians.
Consistency is a good thing, right?
John,
Really, I’m not bitter- at least no more bitter than you appear to be against me.
This idea just crossed my mine today as I was trying to come up with an illustration (other than Christmas) that people might be able to understand how the real album in question trivializes songs with significant themes by including them with songs less so.
Thanks for the clarification. I thought from your original post that this was a real album offered by MM.
Indeed, Lyn. Somebody had better email Snopes.com
Hey, I’d buy it….NOT!
Am I one of the few here who actually got your meaning, Mr Linscott? And I don’t even attend a non-denom “fundamentalist” church. I say Bob Jones U is reaping exactly what is has sown, and I have not a bitter bone in my body.
If you’re going to put it out to the world that you (meaning “BJU”) are THE standard for the type of music a christian should listen to, wow, has the standard shifted with this “oops”. Got to hand it to BJU, though. They may be able to pull it out. Thanks, Mr Linscott for staying on top of this issue for us, the lay folk in christendom. I get it loud and clear.
Greg, for one thing, even with your additional clarification, the image you have posted is illegal. People that see the image but do not read your post carefully may believe that the CD is real. You do not have the authority to use the names Ron Hamilton and Majesty Music in this way. I am sure they will not sue you. However, in any other industry, you would be opening up yourself for civil action.
Again, you are perfectly illustrating what Jesus talked about in the first part of Matt 7.
JohnK, I doubt you will be surprised to hear that, as a lawyer, legal things are of great interest to me. On what grounds do you say that this is illegal? (I trust that you have appropriate knowledge on which to found your definitively stated, serious accusation.)
John,
As far as legal matters go, there is already much precedent that satire and parody such as I have engaged in in the post are well within the bounds of “fair use” (you will note if you try to save it to your hard drive that the image itself is even labeled “parody1.jpg”). In fact, in “any other industry,” they would likely receive much harsher scrutiny and treatment than what I have done here (not that that fact makes it morally acceptable).
That being said, Matthew 7 in full context argues very clearly for exercising discernment and wise judgment- not that one should never judge. Speaking quite frankly, I have had to make painful judgments and evaluations of some of my own approaches to ministry (especially as it relates to past children’s ministry), so I am not averse to weighing in on my own life and finding it wanting, either.
Thanks again for your contributions to the conversation. Your enthusiastic concern for my well-being is encouraging, though we may not agree on the specifics of what that looks like.
Brent, as the person responsible for protecting the trademarks of the company I work at, I have been in federal court several times over issues very similar to this. I know more than most lawyers about the laws involved here. So I am not surprised that you (even being a lawyer) do not understand where the problem is. If Hamilton/Majesty Music wanted to sue, they would a problem proving damages but they would certainly scare Mr. Linscott into removing the post within a New York minute.
JohnK, perhaps I was not clear enough. What I was asking is what you believe the violation is — inquiring minds want to know. Given your stated experience, I anticipate that you can readily state what law is allegedly being violated.
Greg, if you would prefer this discussion go elsewhere, please say so. I do not want to hijack the thread, but at the same time, I do not like vague public accusations of illegal behavior.
John,
It would certainly not come to that. I can assure you that no “scare” tactics would be necessary- a simple conversation and request from MM would see the image come down or be altered to remove the specifics.
That being said, again, there have been several cases that I am aware of where satire and parody falls under the legal bounds of fair use- even for profit (which this blog certainly does not make). It seems rather foolish to pursue this aspect of the conversation further, since as Christians we are governed by a higher standard than even US Copyright.
It may seem hard to swallow for some, but I really do find this trend troubling and I really would wish that MM would be consistent and stop the behaviors that contribute to it. Short of that, though,it seems the least that someone like me can do is to help others to consider my perspective and exercise some discernment of their own- which may or may not entirely match what I see as problematic. That’s the nature of conversations like this in the blogosphere.
Let me give a brief synopsis of where this would go in court and why I believe it is illegal.
First, when I first saw the post, I did not know it was parody. Others on this thread did not see it as parody either. Read the responses here and on SharperIron and you will see that people were confused. Parody that is not obviously parody is a intellectual property problem.
I think Greg realized this too, and that is why he made his clarification. In a court, it would be argued that he did this because he knew he was wrong in the first place. In other words, the clarification became an admission of guilt.
The fact that the blog in itself is non-profit does not mean that it can hurt the profits of other businesses through posting a fake CD cover that obviously fooled some people. Some damage to Majesty Music did occur and would continue to occur if the CD cover stayed up. Majest Music would assert in court that their reputation was damaged because they have worked hard over so many years to establish their brand as conservative Christian, etc., etc.
In the real world, Majesty Music would send a letter and Greg would take it down. It would not go to court because the damage is not worth the court expense and would be difficult to prove what they were. That being said, if there were big damages, Greg would be in trouble.
I do not think that Greg intentionally broke the law, but I wanted to emphasize that in his zeal to judge MM, he became guilty himself.
My advice to Greg if he wanted to keep up the CD cover is watermark it somehow with the words “parody” (light text in the background). That would probably be enough to ensure that he could not be accused of something worse than parody.
JohnK, brother, I believe that you are out of line here. After specific questioning, you are continuing to accuse Greg of being a lawbreaker, yet you still have not identified a law that was broken. I do not know enough IP law to state definitively that no colorable claim could be made here, but your explanation is inadequate. Further, your terminology and your reasoning cause me to question your knowledge in this area.
Finally, I caution you that, unless you are an attorney and a member of the bar, you may be violating law yourself. A state bar association might claim that your advice here constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. I am not suggesting that you are intentionally breaking any law, but perhaps in your zeal to judge Greg you have crossed a line yourself.
FWIW, I made the clarification, not because I thought people found this to be an actual CD (I did put “just imagine” at the top from the beginning), but because a pastor friend I respect thought I was crossing a line and appearing spiteful. Though I do have an obvious philosophical difference, I do not hold any personal venom toward anyone at MM. I wanted to make that very clear- hence the addition statement.
With all due respect, John, this is not established. You have given a scenario where these things could be argued in court- but no verdict has been rendered. With precedent being what it is, it would seem to me that you overstate your case to say I “became guilty (my)self” if as in guilt you mean violating copyright law. A judge might find me guilty, but he might (and probably would) not.
Does bring up some interesting scenarios, though…
“The prosecution calls Wally Whale to the stand…”
Brent seems concerned that I discuss this in actual English terminology instead of the foolishness of his profession. Brent, I hope you are in the 1% of lawyers who are actually competent, but frankly, at the moment, you are just acting like your peers.
JohnK, while I have never met you, I assume you are a brother in the Lord Jesus Christ, our Savior. I humbly ask that please refrain from further personal attacks on Mr Linscott’s blog. If there truly is a “copyright / trademark infringement” (and I am convinced there is NOT), it would be guys like me sitting on a CIVIL jury, not a CRIMINAL one. My understanding, there is a difference between CRIMINAL and CIVIL action. I, for one, knew from the jump this was PARODY and SATIRE. There is, imo, no misuse or anything untoward.
If you feel compelled, please contact Majesty, and let the folks there determine the extent in which this matter should be resolved. It is they whom Mr Linscott is PARODYing, not you. Please, for the sake of the Gospel of Christ, leave this alone. You can only do harm to the testimony of the Lord by your further action. I speak as a lay person, not an ordained minister. I am personally offended by your making your responses so aggressive against Mr Linscott in a public forum.
Mr Linscott, please delete this if I am out of line. God bless us all in the witness of the Gospel.
Oh, JohnK, are you really serious? How can you think that personal attacks advance your position? How competent I am or how foolish my profession may be is not the issue here. You are only digging yourself deeper. Please let it go.
What a hoot.
Or maybe we should be more concerned about violating moral law rather than playing dodgeball with the American legal code (novel concept, I know). John K is close to a valid point: If the parody is not clear, Majesty is being misrepresented, and such is slander. If John K is right, and the parody is not clear (which apparently, to many people it isn’t), even by the American legal definition it’s slander. To be guilty of slander one must prove 3 things exist: a dishonest statement/assertion; injury; and malicious intent.
Given that people have objected to the easy missing of the parody, and this blog has done nothing about it, at least in a Christian’s mind this should constitute dishonesty. No attempt has been made to make it clear that this is a parody, even though several people have objected. Injury is obvious: of course this is hurting Majesty’s sales. That was the whole point. This constitutes malicious intent.
Even if it isn’t wrong in the American legal code, it’s wrong in the Biblical moral code. O.J. Simpson was innocent in the eyes of the American law, but he’s guilty in the eyes of God’s law. This blog has clearly misrepresented Majesty, even if unintentionally, and has made no attempt to fix it, and certainly has made no reparation due to Majesty for the harm caused. If Jesus read this post, I hardly think he’d shake Mr. Linscott’s hand and tell him how proud he is to have such a faithful servant opposing Majesty on such minutia. Have you nothing better to do with your time than tear down a Christian ministry? I’m sorry if you disagree, but I believe there are greater causes to which you could rally people.
Rusty,
As far as making things clear, I’m not sure how much clearer one could get than the “addition” I added only hours after posting… (added emphasis)
As far as harmed caused… how exactly do you establish that? I am an insignificant, out-of-work pastor who apparently has 3-4 commenters on my blog who have given some consideration to my perspective, and just as many (if not more) rallying to support MM. I can almost guarantee that this album’s sales are being helped by some who are now buying the album just because they disagree with my perspective.
As far as minutia, many, many others have developed similar themes over the years (think “Keep Christ In Christmas,” “Jesus is the Reason for the Season”). I’m not sure why one Christian concerned that another Christian is diminishing the message of celebrating Christ’s birth by coupling it with nostalgic celebrations of the commercial event now becomes “unloving,” “minutia,” etc.
Again, how have I misrepresented MM? Have they released a recording with a blend of Sacred Christmas carols and commercial seasonal fare or haven’t they?
I remember a year ago doing a similar parody of SharperIron, when Greg was one of the “honchos” there. Greg, you were offended by it, and so was Brian McCrorie. Because of the offense I took it down, even though there were many that thought it was a hilarious look at the truth. Maybe you should consider following my example on this one
.
Now, don’t say that this is apples and oranges or that I was doing something “overboard” or mean. I kept copies of everything and what I did is no different.
I just figure that “what’s good for the goose . . .”
Bobby,
What you did was intentionally disruptive and in response to personal actions against you (it immediately followed removal of posting privileges of you and friends at the site in question), not to mention anonymous (until we figured out who was behind it).
But this isn’t about that.
About your points that you may be actually helping rather than hindering Majesty sales and you’re not important, I consider both irrelevant.
You ask how you’ve misrepresented Majesty. People have gotten the impression that Majesty is coming out with a Valentine’s Day recording with secular love songs. That’s not true.
About your last paragraph, I could make just as strong a case that they’re helping the cause of Christmas merely by using the word “Christmas”, which has become taboo in our secular society.
On a tangent, I’m curious to know why you take no issue with the non-Christian songs riddled throughout their other albums. They have an entire CD dedicated to food songs, yet you make no objection to that.
Rusty, your comment reads like a TV lawyer’s speech to the jury. It may sound great to the entertainment-saturated folks in TV-land, but your data and analysis are simply inaccurate. Your false assumptions and ignorance of the law do not magically become fact merely because you assert them to be so. This isn’t Matlock (and yes, I know I’m dating myself), and Wikipedia is not a definitive source of legal information.
No one is trying to “play dodgeball with the American legal code,” and neither are we interested in dodging God’s moral law. Our greatest passion is to love God with all of our heart, soul, and might (Deut. 6:5), which is the greatest commandment of all God’s moral law. Sometimes our love for God requires that we take painful stands for truth.
Between Pastor Linscott’s often-quoted “ADDITION” and the discussion which has ensued, the only people who could miss the fact that this was a parody intended to illustrate a point are those who either cannot or refuse to read plain English.
Some of these comments have caused me to recall Neil Postman’s scathing critique of the TV news media and the (dis)information they provide. Postman noted, “I am saying we are losing our sense of what it means to be well informed. Ignorance is always correctable. But what shall we do if we take ignorance to be knowledge?” (Amusing Ourselves to Death, pp. 107-9).
Rusty,
In response to the points you consider irrelevant- then you must naturally concede you point that I have hurt the sales of MM. You speculate, but have nothing of substance.
I’ve already addressed the misrepresentation issue. No one has let without clarifying that this is not an actual recording. Lyn Marshall’s comment was sardonic- I am quite sure she realized that the disc was fictitious.
Regarding “the cause of Christmas”- I am much more concerned with the cause of Christ.
As far as the food songs- well, I wouldn’t want to be accused of being “unloving…”
But I have gone on record as being uncomfortable with MM’s continued use of “edutainment” of which the CD you mention would be an example.
I have edited my comment above, edited Rusty’s comment, and deleted another one that essentially asked us to ignore the portion I eventually edited.
Carry on!
Those are absolutely untrue statements that you have made, Greg. It did not immediately follow the removal of posting privileges and if it was so anonymous, why did we make it so obvious? Maybe your memory is failing. I’ll have to assume that. Your timeline is certainly skewed, to say the least.
You are pointing out hypocrisy in MM. I am doing the same with you. Why shouldn’t this be about that? When we used a little satire concerning you and your friends, you all went into “max-protect” to the point of telling one man that if he ever posted a link to the site at SI he would be banned for it. Every time it was mentioned at SI, you actually deleted the post! It was hilarious to watch you and your friends behave like that, but it still smacks of hypocrisy to see you do this to MM.
Well, this is your little slice of the blogosphere, so I reckon that you can just delete or rewrite this if you wish, but I figure it is worth the try.
Bobby,
Feel free to continue this further with me via email (greglinscott at gmail.com). I obviously haven’t spent as much time dwelling on the matter you bring up as much as you have.
Cheap shot, Greg. I haven’t brought this up to you since it happened. Haven’t thought of it in months, but reading this blog, I couldn’t help but rembember and note the inconsistency. It is dissapointing to see you attempt to paint me as obsessed instead of dealing with what I see as hypocrisy. No further comments, your honor. I’m out. Carry on guys.
Bobby,
It truly isn’t intended as a cheap shot. With your archived records, referenced timeline, and so on, it certainly does seem you’ve given the occasion much more thought than I have of late. I certainly hadn’t thought of it at all for quite some time, particularly with other life events taking precedence of late.
I will continue with you personally.
Well, I was going to call the N.I.C.E. Police, but it looks like they’re already on the case!
Sounds like Bobby, John and Rusty have axes to grind with you, Greg!
So, it’s extremely simple, and I can sum it up in a simple sentence;
IT’S A PARODY, PEOPLE!!!
Now, back to the sniviling, sniping, and whining that we ALL love to read.
Too bad this album wasn’t on Nap$ter…I would have downed it already…thanks Greggie…
Greggie??? GREGGIE??? Lilrabbi, your N.I.C.E. police may be needed after all.
Only because he is currently my pastor is he allowed to get away with “Greggie.”
I stand with you on this one, Mr Linscott. Keep up the good work.
So, Greg, can you say with a straight face that this parody is an action worthy of a preacher (even an out of work one)? Does it meet the definition of blameless when multiple people believe that what you are doing is illegal?
When you candidate at your next church, will you be embarrassed when the pulpit committee reads this parody (and they will).
How would you like it if someone posted a parody of you that harmed your testimony?
One thing I agree with you on–you are probably helping MM’s sales of this album, and maybe that is the justice they deserve.
JohnK, when you say “multiple people believe that what you are doing is illegal,” I infer that you mean yourself and Rusty. Frankly, the number of persons is less important than the expertise of those persons. Here the inaccuracies in your understanding of the law undercut the weight that your asserted legal opinions warrant. Please let this go.
As to potential embarrassment, Greg can speak for himself as to what he may feel. However, I see no reason that he should feel embarrassed. He was trying to illustrate his concern using something other than Christmas. If Majesty Music’s reputation has been harmed, it is because of their own actions in real life and not from Greg’s illustration in blogdom.
Brent, I don’t believe you know beans about intellectual property law. Most lawyers don’t. So quit throwing around your “lawyer” label like I am supposed to be impressed.
A good time was had by all….
A good time was had by all….
John,
I am quite aware that people (including those on pulpit committees) could read this. I use my real name in my online activity (and always have). I am a firm believer in transparency. I think it would be important that someone who was interested or curious get as full and complete a picture as they could of who I am, what I believe, and how I operate.
In fact, the blog address is clearly included on my ministry resume site.
Have a great day.
Greg,
Thank you for posting both the Christmas album info and the parody, which I DID recognize as parody. I am a sucker for Christmas albums and usually get a new one each year. I probably would have ‘trusted’ MM and ordered it only to have to return it. I believe it is the responsibility of our Christian leaders to help us discern that which is Godly. Yes, we can have appropriate ‘fun’ music such as “sleigh ride” for the winter but with the demise of Christ in Christmas as believers, parents and teachers we need to focus on CHRIST. BJU and MM have been proclaimed to be THE STANDARD, the safe haven for those of us who don’t have the time to check every note, key, tempo etc… and although I have enjoyed Renfrow’s work in the past the CD does go over the line.
When one starts accepting compromise their standards begin to fall apart. I know this, sadly by experience as a parent who allowed a compromise in music that negatively effected the spiritual life of one very dear to me.
In a world of “Warm Fuzzies” we need people to be discerning. I don’t see the parody as any different than object lessons that most fundamental preachers use every week! It made the point very clear.
Thank you!
Whether or not Greg is being consistent here is somewhat irrelevant. I am glad that he now recognizes the danger of mixing light and darkness in music by MM and BJU. I warned of this some months ago here and was dismissed.
BJU is now an APOSTATE institution and I have no hesitation in saying so. No one in their right mind should send their kids there. For those who doubt me, I will attach a short excerpt from a longer work that sets out all of the evidence:
http://www.ivanfoster.org/article.asp?date=9/26/2007&seq=1039
On March 2007 in preparation for a visit to the BJU campus by a radical homosexual group called Soulforce, President Stephen Jones made this startling admission about his “friends” at the Campus Chapel,
The homosexuals I know are extremely nice……..I have friends who are struggling with homosexuality, I have friends who are not struggling but have given themselves over to this lifestyle…. the issue is not how nice these people are and they are….the issue is not how wrong Christians may have been in the past and how we have spoken about this in the past and we have been wrong in the past…
Speaking after meeting Romney privately in October 16, 2007, Dr. Bob Jones III said to the Greenville News,
And I just believe that this man has the credentials both personally and ideologically in terms of his view about what American government should be to best represent the rank and file of conservative Americans… He’s a very presidential guy. He has a loving family. He has, as far as I can tell, no scandal connected with his life. I can’t say that about all of the candidates unfortunately.
Ok… Is Herb Evans out there, too?
For the record, I don’t agree at all that this is a sign of Bob Jones becoming apostate. There is a world of difference between being in some way irregular (I’m sure I am in some way or another myself), and full-blown apostasy. If we want to talk apostasy, let’s look at someone like Rowan Williams or Katharine Jefferts-Schiori. If we want to talk hovering close to heresy, let’s talk Rob Bell or Brian Maclaren.
But Bob Jones University? Please.
Oh wait, I forgot… Stephen Jones does wear low-profile wire rimmed glasses… That’s a sign of apostasy if there ever was one…
Greg,
I think the parody was very unnecessary. I disagree with most of your position, though I believe you have a right to be discerning and to be concerned. That is fundamentalism in action.
Sam Hanna,
Whether intentionally or not, I think you’ve misrepresented the published statements of Stephen Jones. I’ve seen those statements in full context and there is nothing insidious or “apostate” about them. I don’t agree with everything BJU does, but it was BJU that taught me the critical thinking skills to disagree with them and it was BJU that taught me the grace to do so without throwing out the baby with the bath water.
To all,
I’ve been amazed at how many times MM and BJU have been treated as if they were almost synonymous. It seems like for the older generation there is a lot of resentment about things MM and BJU have said or done in the past and/or positions they have taken. When I say “resentment,” I mean it in a neutral sense that people resent what they believe was error. And I’m confident there were things taught that were in error. I trust that each of us can keep that resentment from turning to bitterness or from clouding our vision now that time has passed.
We have a right to disagree in the context of fundamentalism. I think the most beneficial discussion that could come out of this would be the principles behind the application (like discernment, piety, etc.).
For what it’s worth.
Grace to you.
Let me define how I read apostasy. It is a departure from a previously held Biblical principle. The Jones family and BJU have patently done that and this is evidenced by simply comparing the statements of Bob Jones III of 25 years ago when he publicly:
(1) condemned Billy Graham for saying he had “homosexual friends.”
(2) condemned Jerry Falwell for supporting Mormons in his Moral Majority
(3) condemned accreditation as unBiblical
You can believe in the fundamentals (I am sure Billy Graham could sign up to the Niagra resolutions) and still be an apostate in practice. Apostasy is a lot wider than simply denying the Virgin Birth.
The comments attributed to Stephen Jones are completely within context. The man stated that sodomites are “nice ” people and he has many “sodomite friends.” You can spin that how you want Jason but that is the reality. How can someone who was educated all his life and has worked all his working life on a Fundamentalist Campus have sodomite friends? Has he not read I Cor 5:9?
For those who doubt me, they can listen to his “sermon” – the quotation is just after the 7 minute mark:
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=41007143356
Sam Hanna,
You didn’t say they had apostasized (as in departed from stated principles). You said BJU was an apostate organization. Generally, in Christianity, that means one has departed from the foundational principle of the Gospel. As troubling as some things might be that you’ve mentioned, nothing you have said sheds any evidence that they have departed from that.
Jason,
I’m sure I’m not going to convince you it was necessary at this stage, but I could think of no more effective way than to come up with the parallel. Many were struggling to see what problems I had with the Renfrow CD. No one would argue that MM releasing the “In The Garden” album would be a good idea. If some can see the parallel (even if they don’t agree with my conclusions), than I think my point has been made and my purpose served.
Regarding BJ and MM being synonymous- at least in this particular conversation- we are discussing a BJU prof’s recording that was published by MM. That seems a good reason to explain why some speak of them in the same breath for the purposes of this discussion, anyway.
Greg,
I think I understand what you’re saying and your explanation of your motives. As I mentioned, I disagree with your position but you have a right to hold it.
Sam,
I have listened to the sermon. You are mischaracterising Stephen Jones though I’m sure it’s not intentional. Since this is somewhat of a hijack, I’ll leave it at that.
“Grace to You”…Jason, are you aware that John MacArthur uses that as a copyrighted phrase?
“© 2005-2007. Grace to You. All rights reserved.
View our privacy policy. Contact us.”
You can see this on his website here:
http://www.gty.org/
It’s at the bottom of the page.
So, if Greg is using parody about MM that could be used against him as potential legal action, then I submit to all on this thread that Jason is using a phrase someone uses as his radio / website copyrighted phrase. Think MacArthur could take Jason to court over this?
Just a thought!
:sigh:
A little levity to levity the whole thread!