Bristol Sycamore

My blog about my feelings now, twenty-something years after leaving the Jesus Army

Surviving the Jesus Army[1]

Wasn't it agreed that personal blogs where a no go area for this artical? (please sign this)

Sure, but this is not on the article.Bristol Sycamore (talk) 11:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:Jesus cult logo.JPG

An image that you uploaded, Image:Jesus cult logo.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. John Campbell 14:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I have added these details to the Summary: "Legal advice was sought in 1985, prior to publication, when the advice given was that the graphic consitituted a clear parody and was therefore not an infringement of copyright. Upon publication no legal challenge was made about copyright by the Jesus Fellowship Church and the parody has been in the public domain for 22 years without challenge." -Peter EveleighBristol Sycamore 15:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment: I find the idea that this should be a copyvio of the original logo absurd, but I find the tagging somewhat lagging in detail; you say in the text that the parody "has been in the public domain", but the tagging says that you own(ed) the copyright, personally - which of these is right? Precise description of who made it and who has the right to assign copyright is a Good Thing! --Alvestrand 11:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not totally sure what you are saying, Alvestrand, but I shall try to respond and if I don't seem to answer you point, please let me know. As regards "public domain" I guess I may have misused the term.I did not mean it is publically owned, though I honestly wouldn't care who used it. I just meant that it has been "out there" (which I think is the pre-internet definition of the word) - visible, available to be seen etc and that despite this, the JA has never contested copyright before. So the challenge strikes me now as just an attempt to make it invisible now. I designed the Jesus Cult logo, so I own its copyright, but I never thought of it in terms of ownership before.Bristol Sycamore 12:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Only just understood what Alvestrand meant by copyvio; he thought the JA claim about my logo being a violation was absurd. I had assumed the term was a slip of the pen, a typo. I hadn't realised that he agreed with me.Bristol Sycamore 17:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Canaldrifter

Hi Tony, if clicking on my Talk tab brought you here, I have left you a message about the revert in your Talk page. All the best, Peter Bristol Sycamore (talk) 12:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

JA Comments

Hi Peter:

No worries. Definitely organize as you see fit. I really wasn't sure where to put the comment.

I have no experience with JA. I stumbled upon a blog of someone who was a former member (http://catholicconvert.wordpress.com/about-me-long-version/). I'm not in the UK, so I had never heard of them. So I went to Wikipedia to find out more and was, as I said, surprised by how sanitized the article was. And the discussion page really clued me in as to why.

I didn't realize you were a former member until coming to your user page. So we're even! In some ways, having a former member and a current member hashing out the details at least has the potential to give a fair account. I just got the impression from the discussion page that John is of the opinion that anything on that page has to be approved by him, as if he's the "owner" of the work. Fortunately, that's not how Wikipedia is intended to work.

Sorry if my comments were overly harsh. I don't mean to dismiss the whole article. I was just frustrated that I couldn't get the full story at Wiki. But that's what Google's for, eh? I admire what you're working toward and can appreciate the obstacles you're up against. Keep it up! Gramby (talk) 16:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Gramby. I'll respond to this on your talk page.Bristol Sycamore (talk) 18:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

File:Jesus cult logo.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Jesus cult logo.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)