What Is the Legal Basis for the Bhaktivedanta Archives?
Dear Ekanatha Prabhu, Hare Krishna! Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!
Considering the recently published article on the Sampradaya Sun, entitled:
Ekanatha said “It’s too controversial”, Not Me ,
and the fact that I couldn’t find one single GBC resolution ( http://pratyatosa.com/GBCRES.htm ), authorizing the Bhaktivedanta Archives to do anything , some questions come to mind:
1. Did you actually make the statement that the unreleased tapes are “too controversial?” (This statement seems to be a complete contradiction of your earlier statement claiming that the Bhaktivedanta Archives is “non-political!”)
2. If so, then in what way are these tapes “too controversial?”
3. What is the BA’s legal basis?
4. Is the BA a legal 501c3 not-for-profit corporation?
5. If so, then in what state (of the United States) is it incorporated?
6. Isn’t your legally mandated annual board meeting supposed to be a matter of public record? If so, where are the transcripts?
7. Isn’t it also legally mandated that the corporation’s board of directors be a matter of public record? If so, then who are they?
8. Aren’t the corporation’s by-laws supposed to be a matter of public record? If so, then where are they?
9. If you fail to provide the above mentioned corporate information to anyone who requests it, aren’t you in danger of losing your status as a Federally approved non-profit organization?
10. Do the BA corporation’s by-laws state that the BA is subservient to the GBC, the BBT, and/or the BBTI? If not, then why not?
11. Even if there was a resolution passed by the GBC that the BA is authorized to do what it is doing, even the GBC, as it is presently constituted, has a very questionable legal basis, and even more questionable is the legal basis for the BBT / BBTI as they are now constituted. Isn’t that true?
12. Who is the BA’s GBC representative?
13. What’s to stop legal action from being taken by a group of devotees who can prove that they are the real disciples of Srila Prabhupada to force the BA to turn over Srila Prabhupada’s priceless legacy to them?
Your servant,
Pratyatosa Dasa
–
Comment: The biggest problem is that the Archive devotees are incompetent (I can prove it) and they are in it for the money (That’s obvious). Even after 32 years, they still haven’t done their most basic archiving duties that should have been done in the first year!
I’ve been telling them for years to make high quality, exact copies of Srila Prabhupada’s original tapes available on the Internet as free downloads, but they are obviously afraid that it might decrease their profit margins and therefore decrease their householder independence, so they simply ignore the requests of not only myself, but of Rocana Prabhu, Madhudvisa Prabhu, Visnu Murti Prabhu, and many others. Archiving is obviously of secondary importance to them! 🙁
The situation at the Archives is an emergency. Let’s not let personal gripes get in the way of our quest to save Srila Prabhupada’s precious legacy, which is obviously in great danger. More than 1900 signatures on the Petition is nothing to sneeze at! Don’t you think that to say that the petition is ” misguided and unnecessary ” is a bit of an offense to those more than 1900 devotees?
—
From Kapindra Swami
Does the Archives have the sole rights to Srila Prabhupada’s lectures, etc or it is public property like the Hare Krishna mantra and the Bhagavad-gita? Kapindra Swami
Dear Kapindra Maharaja, Hare Krishna! Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!
Good question. I don’t think that public lectures can be copyrighted, but the private conversations might be another matter. However, an ISKCON lawyer who looked into the matter told me some years ago, that none of Srila Prabhupada’s recorded materials, even including the record albums, were ever legally copyrighted, so they are all in the public domain. Therefore, the BBTI, when they claim to hold the copyrights, are either simply in illusion or they are just pretending.
A few years back, a devotee started a “Govinda’s” restaurant in Chapel Hill, North Carolina that sold beer and wine. When the GBC man in charge of restaurants, Badrinarayana das, tried to sue them, he found out that even the name “Govinda’s” wasn’t trademarked or copyrighted, so he had no legal basis for a lawsuit. The end result was that the GBC agreed to pay the restaurant owner $5000 if he would please, pretty please, just change the name from “Govinda’s” to “Gavinda’s!” Might be a good way for other entrepreneurs to make some money off the GBC! 😮
On a related issue, please see the forwarded message below together with the comment from a female older devotee from Prabhupada Village (where the Bhaktivedanta Archives is located).
Your servant,
Pratyatosa Dasa
Speak Your Mind