John Dehlin is thinking about bringing Mormon Stories back

[USUC]

This one is pretty solid:

https://sunstone.org/series/sunstone-history/

I've listened to most episodes (you know me, can't leave it alone). They started around COVID times and it was rusty for awhile. But it gets better.

Mrs. NWC is a big fan. She was never a Mormon history buff but they present it in a way that is engaging and interesting.

Perfect. Thank you

[MartyFunkhouser]

Are there any LDS history podcasts put there that aren't spiteful JD nonsense but also cover deep history with nuance?

How dare you question the intellectual honesty of Dr John Dehlin.

[BigPiney]

Are there any LDS history podcasts put there that aren't spiteful JD nonsense but also cover deep history with nuance?

I have good things about this one but haven't listened myself.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...s/id1676164770

[USUC]

I have good things about this one but haven't listened myself.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...s/id1676164770

Subscribed. Thank you.

[BigPiney]

Subscribed. Thank you.

Let me know how it goes.

[YOhio]

Church sues Mormon Stories for copyright and trademark infringement.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist...nding-concerns

[Moliere]

Church sues Mormon Stories for copyright and trademark infringement.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist...nding-concerns

It seems like the church has a solid case on this one. I’m sure Dehlin will play the martyr if he loses.

[BigFatMeanie]

It seems like the church has a solid case on this one. I’m sure Dehlin will play the martyr if he loses.

Oh you know he will.

Reading the link, it seems like they went through mediation (not sure if that was formal mediation by a certified mediator) and one of the sticking points was that Mormon Stories wouldn't/didn't add a disclaimer to their podcast saying that it was not endorsed by or affiliated with the church. That doesn't seem like an unreasonable request so I don't understand why MoSto would choke on it other than just stubbornness and a desire to play the martyr.

[Jeff Lebowski]

It seems like the church has a solid case on this one. I’m sure Dehlin will play the martyr if he loses.

Yeah, I am sure that is the point all along.

[Donuthole]

Church sues Mormon Stories for copyright and trademark infringement.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist...nding-concerns

I've seen some debate on this by lawyer friends on facebook. One of them is convinced that this is a very petty, small-vision move by the church. I found the response from an actual PI lawyer interesting:

[The following is not so much for you specifically, as it is more to just get some facts, and my perspective out there.]

At the same time, as a published academic of IP, specifically copyright and trademark (but, by no means a globally recognized expert, nor an attorney), I believe there is definite merit in this case from an Art. 1 Sec. 8 Clause 3 (Commerce Clause) perspective ... just simply based on the fact that there is clearly a likelihood of public confusion with the source of the material ... especially upon initial exposure. Some people definitely go to Mormon Stories, for the first time, thinking they are going to get access to Church supported materials .... based simply on the name and branding. Many are surprised when they discover that is not the case.

I remember the MS "Faith Crisis?" campaign (billboards, etc.) in the earlier years ... and many people thought by going to MS they would find a support group to guide them through their faith crisis that was backed by the Church--or at least believing members--whether officially or not.

This is not to say the confusion was intentional by JD. I'm certain this was not the case. I think some of the MS branding elements really just happened to cross over with what the Church had ... and, of course, each entity made adjustments over the years (swoosh features, color schemes, term usage, etc.), which also happened generate confusion.

And, there are plenty of arguments as to whether one entity made changes before the other, and then the other followed suit ... who knows if this was intentional. I doubt it was for either side ... but it definitely makes for some eyebrow-raising speculation.

And, the fact remains that, even though trademark law is currently a wild west proposition, still if someone holds a registered trademark in certain uses or categories (such as the Church with the word "Mormon"), the onus is upon the trademark holder to protect its trademark (i.e. no one else is going to fight for you) ... so there is actually incentive to stretch beyond what might be considered a legal boundary, and then rely on the pushback from the potential infringer, to see where the line actually ends up being drawn. This is what the Church is now doing.

Further, the claims that the Church's recent position to move away from formally using the term "Mormon" undermines the ability to enforce the trademark it holds on "Mormon" are ill-founded. People and entities who hold a trademark, can, indeed, seek to contol its usage or lack thereof (including their own usage).

And, trademarks, unlike copyrights, can be protected indefinitely ... there is no time limit of protecting the trademark (brand, source, etc.). This is because the public needs to know who is creating and distributing the product (good or service) continually, in order to properly patronize the correct creator... and trademarks are one way to do this.

Lastly, if true that the Church was willing to consider the possible trademark infringement acceptable (without any formal licensing agreement in place), if only MS posted a small disclaimer overtly stating that MS was unaffiliated with the Church, then why would MS not just do that? ... seems not only simple but accurate. (I don't know why the disclaimers already on the MS sites, both in the descriptions and in the copyright notices, do not already fulfill this request).

Either way, it just feels like the full story from each side has not yet come out.

[MartyFunkhouser]

Dehlin is a dumbass. I side with the LDS church on this one. However, it is poor form to put out there details from the mediation.

I believe that Dehlin won't settle this because he wants the publicity associated with it. Grifters gonna grift.

[Moliere]

Dehlin is a dumbass. I side with the LDS church on this one. However, it is poor form to put out there details from the mediation.

I believe that Dehlin won't settle this because he wants the publicity associated with it. Grifters gonna grift.

I was thinking the same thing. He can fundraiser and make money on this so his 501c3 that is basically his own personal piggy bank can be more flush with cash. Is he still the only employee paid out of his nonprofit?

[Applejack]

Here's a question for the legal nerds: why didn't the church bring a trademark dilution claim? I skimmed the complaint, and while they allege trademark infringement (likely a winner, although with minimal damages) they don't seem to raise a dilution claim. Tarnishment seems to be the church's issue with Dehlin's use of the trademark (i.e., that his use "tarnishes" the reputation of the church), yet they just raise trademark infringement. Even if infringement is proven, they have to show how that the unlawful use caused them damages; I don't think this will amount to much. so I thought I was listening to a faith-promoting website and clicked on Dehlin's show; it's unlikely that that show caused me to lose my faith, more likely that a just wasted a few minutes of my time on this stupid podcast. At most, the church is going to win on TM infringement and then get some nominal amount of damages that Dehlin will EASILY make up for in increased donations.

But if they win a dilution (tarnishment) claim, that could be real damages. And while the damages would be just a drop in the bucket for the church's coffers, they would be a podcast-ending event for Dehlin.

[Donuthole]

Here's a question for the legal nerds: why didn't the church bring a trademark dilution claim? I skimmed the complaint, and while they allege trademark infringement (likely a winner, although with minimal damages) they don't seem to raise a dilution claim. Tarnishment seems to be the church's issue with Dehlin's use of the trademark (i.e., that his use "tarnishes" the reputation of the church), yet they just raise trademark infringement. Even if infringement is proven, they have to show how that the unlawful use caused them damages; I don't think this will amount to much. so I thought I was listening to a faith-promoting website and clicked on Dehlin's show; it's unlikely that that show caused me to lose my faith, more likely that a just wasted a few minutes of my time on this stupid podcast. At most, the church is going to win on TM infringement and then get some nominal amount of damages that Dehlin will EASILY make up for in increased donations.

But if they win a dilution (tarnishment) claim, that could be real damages. And while the damages would be just a drop in the bucket for the church's coffers, they would be a podcast-ending event for Dehlin.

My suspicion is that they aren't after damages, but more injunctive relief. If winning on infringement forces him to stop using the word Mormon, I think they are satisfied with that. (FWIW, I don't know if winning on infringement would force that).

[Pelado]

Here's a question for the legal nerds: why didn't the church bring a trademark dilution claim? I skimmed the complaint, and while they allege trademark infringement (likely a winner, although with minimal damages) they don't seem to raise a dilution claim. Tarnishment seems to be the church's issue with Dehlin's use of the trademark (i.e., that his use "tarnishes" the reputation of the church), yet they just raise trademark infringement. Even if infringement is proven, they have to show how that the unlawful use caused them damages; I don't think this will amount to much. so I thought I was listening to a faith-promoting website and clicked on Dehlin's show; it's unlikely that that show caused me to lose my faith, more likely that a just wasted a few minutes of my time on this stupid podcast. At most, the church is going to win on TM infringement and then get some nominal amount of damages that Dehlin will EASILY make up for in increased donations.

But if they win a dilution (tarnishment) claim, that could be real damages. And while the damages would be just a drop in the bucket for the church's coffers, they would be a podcast-ending event for Dehlin.

My suspicion is that they aren't after damages, but more injunctive relief. If winning on infringement forces him to stop using the word Mormon, I think they are satisfied with that. (FWIW, I don't know if winning on infringement would force that).

Where's Lost Student when you need him?