Response of Harry McMullan to
Urantia Foundation's complaint about the publication of Part IV

Wednesday, 25 Aug 1999 13:44:21 -0500


Richard Keeler, Georges DuPont, Kwan Choi, Gard Jameson, Mo Siegel

Trustees of Urantia Foundation
533 Diversey Parkway
Chicago, IL 60614

Dear Richard, Georges, Kwan, Gard, and Mo:

This is in reply to your certified letter dated August 5 and postmarked
August 18, 1999 in which you demanded that I refrain from distributing
Part IV of The Urantia Book. Though the letter was addressed to me, I am
answering it in my capacity of President of Michael Foundation, Inc.,
the publisher of Jesus -- A New Revelation.

What I know regarding your copyright to the Urantia Book differs
markedly from what you assert that I know. It is the following:

The original decision by Judge Urbom invalidating Urantia Foundation’s
copyright to the Urantia Book by summary judgment was based on a correct
analysis of the facts and the law concerned. While ruling -- most
significantly -- that revelation is uncopyrightable, Judge Shroeder’s
9th Circuit reversal of the District Court decision relied upon the fact
that members of the forum posed questions to the revelators, a situation
which she deemed supplied sufficient human involvement for copyright
protection (ignoring, among other things, the fact that Urantia
Foundation was not even the successor in interest to the forum).

The 9th Circuit decision was given without citing any precedents,
because none exist. The concept that individuals who merely pose
questions to an author are entitled to copyright protection would create
the ludicrous situation of giving anyone who talks with an author about
his upcoming book a claim to copyright. Such a legal theory would open
to challenge the copyrights of 99% of authors to claims by, for example,
friends and neighbors with whom they might have bounced around ideas
regarding their upcoming books, not to say copy editors whose job it is
to rewrite the books themselves. Amicus curiae against such a ludicrous
position would likely be filed by any number of individuals and
publishing houses who would not want the entire concept of authorship in
copyright law so radically overthrown.

Quite apart from the issue of forum questions, the “History of the
Urantia Movement”, which Urantia Foundation introduced as having been
written by Wm. S. Sadler, trustee and former contact commissioner,
forecloses Urantia Foundation from now claiming any other species of
that human involvement which would be necessary in order to qualify the
Urantia Book for copyright protection. That document states
unequivocally that the contact commission “had no editorial authority.
[Its] job was limited to spelling, capitalization, and punctuation.”

Further, Urantia Foundation is on record admitting that “no human being
wrote any portion of the text of the Papers.” This testimony (made when
Urantia Foundation was basing its copyright claim on a different theory)
supplies a mortal blow to the weak “compilation” copyright which is all
that now remains of the original “full” copyright which Urantia
Foundation obtained based on the false claim that it had authored the
Urantia Papers.

And there are other grounds on which Urantia Foundation’s copyright to
the entire Urantia Book is defective. It is quite certain that the
poorly thought-out, indeed absurd, Shroeder opinion will be reversed
upon any serious challenge.

However, even if the Shroeder opinion were upheld, its very terms
preclude the enforceability of the copyright with respect to the
material contained in Jesus -- A New Revelation. This is the case
because all evidence reveals that Part IV of the Urantia Book was
delivered to the contact commission as a completed document without any
of the forum involvement which Judge Shroeder stipulated as the basis
for copyright protection.

In short, gentlemen, your chances of prevailing in a copyright challenge
to the entire Urantia Book are very slim; and with respect to Part IV --
at least against someone whom you can neither successfully intimidate
nor financially exhaust -- you will most certainly lose. Jesus -- A New
Revelation will remain on the market until such time as a court of
competent jurisdiction finally rules that it must be removed, an event
which we are confident will never occur.

However, for me there is far more to this issue than the legalities
involved. I believe that in the world to come I will have to account for
what I did with respect to the “greatest of all human knowledge” which
according to the Urantia Book is “to know the religious life of Jesus
and how he lived it.” (196:1.3) Other statements by Jesus are equally
compelling, such as, “And now I declare to you that I, if I be lifted up
on earth and in your lives, will draw all men to myself and into the
fellowship of my Father.” (174:5.13)

The only arguments I have heard against proceeding forward on those and
similar imperatives are based on the so-called “mandates,” which, since
they were given to none of us now alive, have no more than the status of
hearsay. I find it easy to obey the direct words of Jesus in situations
where they conflict with so-called “mandates” which by their own terms
were supposed to be burned 20 years ago. I see the relationship of the
so-called “mandates” to the revelation itself as no more than a 20th
century version of the oral traditions which the Sanhedrin taught were
more sacred and binding than Scripture itself (153:3.7), and against
which oral traditions Jesus was in “constant collision.” (124:1.13)

Michael Foundation is doing no more than the work you yourselves are
called to do. Yet instead of pursuing the many worthy activities open to
you in furtherance of the kingdom of God and brotherhood of man, you are
contemplating allocating a significant fraction of your resources toward
legal action in order to suppress the dissemination of Jesus’ gospel.

Any such effort, you must be aware, will consume many years and immense
resources, and ultimately will prove futile. While I would much prefer
to spend my time and energy promoting the gospel, if it becomes my duty
to defend the free access of people to God’s (not your) revelation, be
assured that I will consider it the highest honor to do so. This is true
notwithstanding the fact that two of you are among my dearest friends.

Freedom of religion is inseparable from freedom of religious expression.
People like myself who believe that the Urantia Book is a divine
revelation will no more submit to controls on its dissemination than
Christians would to controls on their ability to use the texts of the
original manuscripts from which the Bible was compiled. The fifth
epochal revelation should and will be free.

You can learn this lesson voluntarily or you can let life itself teach you. Your misguided
control/suppression approach is doomed because human religious
expression cannot lastingly be squelched. Instead of experiencing
consternation over the passing of your unjust control over the
fellowship of believers, you should rejoice that a new day is dawning in
which all sorts of new creativity will be unleashed in work for the
Father’s kingdom. There’s nothing to be scared of. For example, in the
short time in which Jesus -- A New Revelation has been out, significant
numbers of individuals who previously had been unreceptive to the
Urantia Book in its totality have encountered and benefited from the
truth of Jesus’ God-revealing life on earth through that work. And that
is just the start.

Urantia Foundation has a limited future so long as it attempts to play
religious dictator over the family of believers. Cooperation with the
fellowship of believers, instead of misguided attempts to maintain
unjust control over them, will serve the world -- and yourselves -- much
better. Why not use this opportunity to make a clean break with Urantia
Foundation’s traditional control/suppression approach and give
cooperation/support a try? I predict you would be most delighted with
the support you in turn would thereby receive.

Sincerely,

Harry McMullan, President
Michael Foundation, Inc.