BKWSO lose legal action against BrahmaKumaris.Info

for ex-BKs to discuss matters related to experiences in BKWSU & after leaving.
  • Message
  • Author
User avatar

proy

ex-BK

  • Posts: 492
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2006

Post30 Nov 2007

mr green wrote:EVERYONE there who seems to disagree with the Admin line has been banned!!!!!!!!!!!

Rien ne change plus, n'est-ce pas ... ? to quote ex-l :?.
User avatar

uddhava

ex-BK

  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: 13 May 2006

Post01 Dec 2007

Here is an ex-cult site where the same issue of domain name arises. I don't know whether these guys have been sued.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10422
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Post01 Dec 2007

uddhava wrote:Here is an ex-cult site ...

Nice site. May be the ex-BK event ought to be a general ex-cultie event. We could organize an ex-cultie football league; ex-BK versus ex-Premmies play the winner of the ex-Moonies versus the ex-Scientologists and who ever wins gets to have an early bath with the ex-Family (or the Hookers for Jesus).

The surprising thing is, when you start digging into this whole scene, HOW similar the dynamics are between all the different groups of 'culties', 'ex-culties', 'anti-culties', 'friends and family of culties' ... and the lawyers and sociologists who all make money off the entire debacle.

I am just surprised that the BKW-sue followed the Scientologist's model into litigation, media control and arbitrary beating up and intimidation (e.g. PBKs in India). We are all mad. The whole world is. Some are just more stylishly mad, or expensively mad than others. The secret is in learning to laugh at it all.
User avatar

Mr Green

ex-BK

  • Posts: 1876
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Post01 Dec 2007

Yes, ex-l. Can I add also, there is the art of enjoying your own lot 8).
User avatar

proy

ex-BK

  • Posts: 492
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2006

Invitation from Jayanti Kirpalani

Post01 Dec 2007

proy wrote:As it happens, I just got a mail from the BKs about a new web site they have set up, so I answered them and all the people they sent the mail to, telling them about this forum and about what is happening on the Aussie forum.

This morning my wife got a telephone call from Dundee. It was the Sister in charge of the Aberdeen BK centre, who also, I believe, has responsibility for the whole region of Scotland. She was presenting a workshop or a retreat in Dundee today. Her name is Kathryn Hendry and she spoke to my wife because I was not available at that time. The message Kathryn left for me was that the information I have been reading on this site is incorrect, and she is sure I would not want to be spreading false rumours about the BKWSU. Also Kathryn said that Jayanti Kripalani was concerned about this small problem and that I am welcome to telephone Sister Jayanti at any time to discuss these issues. It was emphasised that Sister Jayanti will welcome a telephone call from me and will be happy to discuss any "problems" i might have.

Needless to say, I will not be having any discussions either with Kathryn or with Jayanti in private.

I extend this invitation to both Kathryn and to Jayanti - if you believe the information on this forum is incorrect then please join this forum and document your views here publicly.

If the information is not correct then I am sure you will both welcome this opportunity to put the record straight, in your own words, for the world to read.

I look forward to discussing these points with you both here soon.

Your posts and opinions will be read with interest by all I am sure, and treated respectfully and politely by myself.

Best Wishes and thank you for your interest.

bkti-pit

Independent, free thinking BK

  • Posts: 509
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2007

Post01 Dec 2007

Thanks Proy!
User avatar

proy

ex-BK

  • Posts: 492
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2006

Post01 Dec 2007

    I have just sent the following email -
To - Kathryn Hendry, Jayanti Kirpalani, Alka Patel.

Hi Kathryn,

Thank you for your telephone call this morning.

Please note that I decline to speak with you or with Jayanti Kirpalani in private, either on the telephone or in person.

I am not interested in having private discussions or meetings with you.

Any telephone calls you make to me will be recorded. Transcripts of these recordings may be published on the internet.

If you wish to discuss the matters you spoke about this morning further then I will be happy to discuss them with you on the public forum on this web site.

http://brahmakumaris.info/bb

You are all very warmly welcomed to air your views on the forum there. Just click on the link above and register (join) the forum.

As you said that you believe the articles published on this web site are inaccurate, then I am sure you will, in your own interests, be eager to write your version of events as you see it on the public forum, so that all the people concerned are able to read your opinions.

Yours sincerely,

bansy

  • Posts: 1593
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2006

Post01 Dec 2007

the information I have been reading on this site is incorrect, and she is sure I would not want to be spreading false rumours about the BKWSU

I hope this can be clarified by an official BK spokesperson.

There is a lot of information on this website. Would this also mean some or all the Murlis and Murli points posted in the website, from the BKs or PBKs otherwise, are incorrect ?

Because if the Murli information is incorrect, and this often includes the latest Avyakt BapDada Murlis, then it will be the BKWSU has been spreading rumours. I am not one who is keen to blowing up issues, rather on the contrary, because this is in essence the core of the entire study ... where are the original Murlis ? (In fact, this is really the only issue I have been campaigning for since the start of the forum). If the Murlis which are posted on this website are from invalid sources, then the BKWSU can be really having a crisis problem. And many souls have or would continually be severely damaged from it especially those who are still serving within the BKWSU.

There is only one way for the BKWSU to free itself from any issues, and that is to make available the original Murlis. Thereafter, everyone is free to decide. God and God's love is unlimited, it cannot be bounded. Distributing edited Murlis has gone on too long, it has become a sanskar in itself. Needless to say, some souls have already taken their own step and moved out and away from the BKWSU. The longer the BKWSU prolong, the further damage they are doing to itself and to others.

If the seed and the root of The Tree is good, then the leaves, flowers and fruit is also good. Picking a fruit from The Tree that looks good, but to find out it comes from rotten core would make that fruit tasteless. At least for me, the seed is the Murli, the words of God.

However, even the BKWSU is bounded by their own drama. So thus there is no need to fear.

Thank you Proy for letting us know of the update.

In the long run, I really hope that no grievances are placed between the BKWSU and any other party souls and that harmonious arrangements are made for all who wish for a truly carefree spiritual study and journey.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10422
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Invitation from Jayanti Kirpalani

Post01 Dec 2007

proy wrote:The message Kathryn left for me was that the information I have been reading on this site is incorrect, and she is sure I would not want to be spreading false rumours about the BKWSU. Also Kathryn said that ... Sister Jayanti will welcome a telephone call from me and will be happy to discuss any "problems" I might have.

Ha! Stick in there Proy and you will get the invitation to the Big House in the Country or even "safe passage" to Madhuban for special treatment! You know, they even feted the son of the leader of the Anti-Party there and had him up to Madhuban. "Family" Janki Kripalani called him!

I am making mental notes here and wish to raise a few questions;
    why would Jayanti Kirpalani consider that YOU have any "problems"?
    why would she care about you?
    what is she able or likely to do any such problems on a practical level anyway; magic away 50% of your bad karma just for confessing to her?
So what did you do to deserve such high level damage limitation!?!

I think your response is quite masterful and a lesson to everyone else on this forum ... do we observe a similar reluctance in the good Sister to engage in open - and documented - discussion again? If something is untrue ... why not offer a public statement or engage in a public discussion with those effected by recent actions? Has the official voice not been somewhat silent during the process of the domain dispute AND since it's result?

If I were a pathologist, I would break down the yuktis (methods) that I have seen in real life to, as so;
    Firstly) the suggestion YOU have the "problem" (similar to the assertion that WE were "embarrassed" by the leaked emails). Why suggest you have the problem? It is not exactly if the BKWSU doesn't have a few problems of it own? This is a good yukti as it puts you on the backfoot as it is your problem ... not theirs as it really is.

    Secondly) from my experience too, the emphasis is on you calling her. If she is so bothered, why cannot she just pick up the telephone, write the email, post on the forum to you ... where is the "official response"? This is a good yukti in my book because, you see, it re-affirms the social order and sets the precedent ... you, the subject, do the running to them.

    Lastly) there is a persistence on behalf of certain elements within the BKWSU to put around rumors within the rest of the family that;

      a) the information on this website is inaccurate,
      b) the Murlis on this website are somehow inaccurate,
      c) the posts on this forum are sometimes moved or remove
    ... WITHOUT ACTUALLY SPECIFYING WHAT THOSE INACCURACIES ARE OR PROVIDING DOCUMENTATION TO PROVE OR DISPROVE SUCH ALLEGATIONS.
If we are to be very specific, e.g. I am really greatful for the erudite Hindi translations offered by Arjun and trust his far much more than the BK's. It is high time the BKWSU DID clarify what was going on with the domain name ... and what the Internet PR Team were talking about when they said Hansa Raval was engaged in dispute regarding a personal defamation case about her medical claims. They mentioned "other correspondence" so what has been going on ... does the BKWSU Internet PR team NORMALLY offer its services to individual BKs for their personal libel cases?

For heaven's sake ... why all this lurking around in the shadows with "acceptable" BKs obviously following this forum and passing back posts, as we saw, and then the leadership wanting to address individuals in private but not the community in public?
mr green wrote:there is the art of enjoying your own lot.

I am not entirely sure if it is the point that you are making, but there does seem to be a similar thread here in that without the gurus, the followers appear to be able to get on with each other quite well. I admire the ex-Premmies for laying bare all the "secret teachings" and laying out a clear section for the press and media. We need to involve more public discussion about these types of groups and the oligarchies that run them.
User avatar

proy

ex-BK

  • Posts: 492
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2006

Re: Invitation from Jayanti Kirpalani

Post01 Dec 2007

ex-l wrote:So what did you do to deserve such high level damage limitation!?!
    I may have developed the devilish trait of thinking for myself :evil:.
ex-l wrote:If something is untrue ... why not offer a public statement or engage in a public discussion with those effected by recent actions?
    Exactly :!:
User avatar

arjun

PBK

  • Posts: 3588
  • Joined: 01 May 2006
  • Location: India

Post01 Dec 2007

Proy,

Your bold move is appreciated. Now the ball is in the court of BKWSO.
ex-l wrote:I think your response is quite masterful ... do we observe a similar reluctance in the good Sister to engage in open - and documented - discussion again? If something is untrue ... why not offer a public statement or engage in a public discussion with those effected by recent actions? Has the official voice not been somewhat silent during the process of the domain dispute AND since it's result?

Just as BKs have come out with their stand on abortions (as mentioned somewhere on this forum), cannot they be requested to come out with their stand vis-a-vis the legal dispute courtesy BK Dr.Hansa Rawal? Do they give public statements only when they have some mega-programmes or even otherwise? Can they be made to give a public statement on the legal dispute by requesting someone from the Press/Media to approach BKWSO Headquarters in London?

By the way, are they organizing any public programme in the near future where mediapersons are invited for press conference? That oppurtunity could be used to request them to come out with their stand on the legal dispute relating to the site.

Mitra of BKs' Aussie Forum keeps giving the schedules of BKWSO pubic programmes/courses at London and other foreign countries.

Regards,
OGS,
Arjun
User avatar

button slammer

PBK

  • Posts: 205
  • Joined: 17 Jul 2006

Press release

Post01 Dec 2007

As there is no 'official' response by BKWU to the members of this forum, despite repeated attempts by members to establish ongoing mutual, open, and honest relations there seems to be no other option but to make everything very public. By this I mean a press release containing details of recent events, and other incidents and areas of concern to members, should be created by the forum members and distributed locally/globally to all major news publications/channels.

ShivBaba has mentioned that the media will offer services for free :). e.g., I am sure The Times of India will be extremely interested in recent developments.
User avatar

proy

ex-BK

  • Posts: 492
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2006

Re: Press release

Post01 Dec 2007

button slammer wrote:By this I mean a press release containing details of recent events and other incidents and areas of concern to members, should be created by the forum members and distributed locally/globally to all major news publications/channels.

Yes - good idea.

If a pdf file could be put together that would be useful. It could be printed out and sent to local and national newspapers as well as being distributed door to door in areas where a BK centre exists.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10422
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Libel, slander, defamation and settlement offers

Post01 Dec 2007

Remember that, generally speaking, UK the law of libel gives something known as "qualified privilege" to "fair comment" on a matter of public interest ... even if such comment is profoundly unfair or insulting.
    A private figure claiming defamation, e.g. a neighbor, roommate, the guy who walks his dog down your street, only has to prove you acted "negligently", which is to say that a "reasonable person" would not have published the defamatory statement.

    A public figure must show "actual malice", e.g. that you published with either knowledge of falsity or in reckless disregard for the truth. This is a difficult standard for a plaintiff to meet. There can be no doubt that the Kripalani Klan court high level publicity internationally and, as such, would be considered public figures.
There are three tests which the defamatory statement must meet in order for a plaintiff to prevail in a suit against anyone or their publisher, the statements are;
    Untrue ... in order to be defamatory, the statement must be untrue. If the statement is true or substantially true, then it is not defamatory, and the case is over.

    Damaging ... in order for the plaintiff to prevail, the statement must have caused real and substantial harm to the person or business. The plaintiff must present evidence of the substantial harm done.

    Knowingly false ... the plaintiff must also show that the defendant knew the statement was untrue, but published or broadcast the statement despite that knowledge.
BTW, in case anyone missed the text removed at the request of this site's attorney;
This is the "settlement" offer that the BKs lawyers offered on October 13, 2007;

a) the BrahmaKumaris.Info domain name be transferred to the BKWSO
b) an agreed alternative domain name not containing their trademarked term, i.e. "Brahmakumaris" be registered and used with the same content as presently found on this disputed site
c) confidentiality be maintained by the parties as to the agreement

He added that;
if b) were unacceptable, they would be willing to consider the registration and use of a domain name by us containing their trademarked term but clearly not underwritten or authorised by the BKWSO, e.g. "Ihatebrahmakumaris.com" containing the same content.

It was removed not to suit the BKs attorney but to keep the BrahmaKumaris.Info's own solicitor happy and as a professional courtesy to him. Amazing that they thought they had the right to "mutually agree" on an alternative domain name NOT containing the "trademarked" term Brahma Kumaris, and that it was up to the BKWSO rather than the BKWSU. You see what I mean about confidentiality being their MO (modus operandi)?

How exactly that was meant to be a settlement AT ALL was a mystery to me. It would actually given LESS rights than losing and put us in a compromised position to them. Following it being made public, the BK's attorney wrote;
User avatar

tete

friends or family of a BK

  • Posts: 200
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2007
  • Location: Earth

Love Is The Seventh Wave

Post01 Dec 2007

uddhava wrote:Here is an ex-cult site where the same issue of domain name arises. I don't know whether these guys have been sued.

Prem Rawat aka Maharaji Information Resource.

The answer is yes. "Re: DMCA Notice of Copyright Infringement on "www.ex-premie.org"". They have and they were successful in fending off their copyright claim:
8. I declare under penalty of perjury that it is my good faith belief that the material displayed on the EPO website claimed by EVI to be in violation of its copyright interests, is misidentified by EVI as constituting any such violation because:

a) some or all of the material identified by EVI is not material in which EVI has an enforceable copyright or has entered the public domain;

b) even if EVI owns a protectible copyright in some or all of the material, the material is misidentified by EVI as a copyright violation because it constitutes "fair use" as defined in 17 U.S.C. 107. Specifically, the material was displayed on the EPO website solely for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research, all within the parameters of the "fair use" limitation in the United States Code.

We too are doing this:
"material was displayed on the EPO website solely for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research, all within the parameters of the "fair use" limitation in the United States Code."

We too receive no renumeration:
"4. Neither myself, nor any other contributor to the site, receives, or has ever received, any form of remuneration resulting from inclusion of the listed material;"

Good on those ex-premies for defending themselves and others in their pursuit for the truth: Love Is The Seventh Wave.

So, I hope the :arrow: "Advancing Army" pays close attention and sees that by the very fact that "BapDada comes to speak to his children" would imply that "God" wants the message/information/Murlis Copyleft. :wink:

Ahchoo, think I am coming down with Chilling Effects. Some Free Speech legislation medication should take care of that virus.
PreviousNext

Return to Commonroom