Christy Olsen

Hey, I just learned that, in fact, MLB does use video review, in a limited capacity.  I wonder whether they'll keep (and inevitably expand) it, or score it as an error and get rid of review.  We'll see.

Rebecca,

There are two sections in the US copyright law that pertain (somewhat) to what you are asking.

The first one concerns creating a derivative work, which is when you take a song and make substantive changes.

[quote] § 106 . Exclusive rights in copyrighted works

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

     (2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;[/quote]

Here is the official definition of a "derivative work":

[quote] A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications, which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.[/quote]

Usually this section applies when trying to claim a new copyright for changes made to a published work, such as what Weird Al Yankovic does.  So while changing the lyrics of a song is technically creating a derivative work, you are not trying to claim a new copyright, so my view is this section doesn't apply.

The section that truly applies is this:

[quote] § 110 . Limitations on exclusive rights: Exemption of certain performances and displays

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, the following are not infringements of copyright:

     (3) performance of a nondramatic literary or musical work or of a dramatico-musical work of a religious nature, or display of a work, in the course of services at a place of worship or other religious assembly;[/quote]

This section brings into question the very need to secure a license to use copyrighted songs in worship.

The bottom line is we make changes to songs all the time.  We play them in different keys, use different chords, add descants, harmonies, and counter-melodies, etc.  If anything, displaying alternate lyrics could be classified simply as a typo.  And section 110 allows us to use religious songs in religious services without permission.  So I don't think you are violating copyright law, neither its letter nor spirit, by changing some lyrics.

Now, I need to say, and this is very important, that I am not a copyright lawyer, nor even what could be called an expert.  I've done a lot of reading on the topic over the years, but my sentiments above are nonetheless just my opinion.

Do with them what you will.

Greg, I am curious what your answer is to the question posed in the title of your post.  Is the Qu'ran the divine word of God?

My answer is no.  The Bible is clear that nothing shall be added to or taken away from it.  Yes, I understand there is debate about which original manuscripts should be part of the official canon.  But that aside, other writings are not the Word of God, no matter what truth they contain.  We face the same issue with the Book of Mormon and papal edicts (which Catholics are supposed to honor as holy truth).

Being able to have a fruitful dialogue with Muslims and other non-Christians is essential, and learning what is in their writings and teachings is an important part of that.  Ultimately, though, everyone will need to come to face the Truth: Jesus is the Son of God, and only through faith in him will anyone be saved.  The Qu'ran will not lead anyone to that Truth (as you stated); the divine Word of God will.