ISKCON Inc. and BBTi to drag Srila Prabhupada to Court

The greatest crime of Iskcon and BBTi: to prove in court,
that Srila Prabhupada is not the author of His books, but a hired worker only.

Srila Prabhupada is degraded to a scribbling of ISKCON doing “works for hire”.
Srila Prabhupada a hired worker? How demoniac IskCon people can get?

Paragraph § 14 – WHEREAS “Prabhupada’s books, including all artwork, glossaries and elaborate purports, were “works for hire” created by ISKCON, Inc. ISKCON, Inc. owned common law copyrights in them from the time they were created, and became the owner of Federal copyrights as soon as they were published with a copyright notice.”

Paragraph § 15 – WHEREAS “BBTi contends that the California trust document dated May 29, 1972 never created a valid trust. However, if it did, and if any of the copyrights ever were owned by that trust, ISKCON, Inc. owned beneficial title to such property because ISKCON, Inc. was the trust beneficiary named in that document.”

Paragraph § 19 – WHEREAS “BBTI believes that ISKCON, Inc. owned the copyrights outright because the works in question were “works for hire” created by ISKCON, Inc. ISKCON, Inc. supplied the employees who worked on the books with their materials and equipment. ISKCON, Inc. also supplied each of them with room and board and with a stipend for personal or family expenses. Such employees included those who worked in the art department, photography department, Sanskrt editors, Bengali editors, English editors, design and layout specialists, and proof readers, among others.”

Paragraph § 20 – WHEREAS “BBTI contends that the California Trust Agreement dated May 29, 1972 did not create a valid trust and that the book publishing and distribution operations of the Movement were in fact never operated according to the provisions of that document. However, in the event the Court finds that that Trust Agreement created a legally valid trust which at the time in question (i.e., 1976) owned some or all of the copyrights registered at that time in the name Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, ISKCON, Inc. was the beneficiary of that trust, and therefore held beneficial title to those copyrights.”

Please see the original court documents of Hansadutta, defending Srila Prabhupada:
http://hansadutta.com/DOWNLOADS/BBTI_Works-for-Hire-argument.pdf

ORIGINAL TRANSCRIPTION OF COURT DOCUMENT

Joseph Fedorowsky, Esq. (SBN 133200)
OXFORD LAW FIRM
5757 West Century Blvd., Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90045
Telephone: (310) 645-9920

Attorneys for Defendant HANS KARY and for
Cross-Complainants HANS KARY, VEDA GUHYA DAS
and DIANE MARIE CHAN, individually and as
TRUSTEES of the BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CENTRAL DISTRICT

BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST, INTERNATIONAL, INC.
a California corporation; and INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY
FOR KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS OF CALIFORNIA, INC.,
a California corporation.

Plaintiffs,
v.
HANS KARY (aka “Hamsadutta”),
a California Citizen and Does 1 through 10, inclusive,

HANS KARY, VEDA GUHYA DAS, and DIANE MARIE CHAN, individually, and as TRUSTEES of the BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST, a California Trust Dated May 29, 1972,

Cross-Complainants,
v.

CASE NO.: BC 170617
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER
RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES SET NUMBER TWO

DATE: January 19, 1998 TIME: 8:30 a.m
Hon. Dion G. Morrow, Retired Judge of the Superior Court
Court Appointed Discovery Referee 5101 Bedford Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90056-1002

Defendants.

INTERROGATORY NO. 13:

State the date on which Robert Grant [Ramesvara] was appointed as a “BBT Trustee” as alleged in paragraph 39 of your complaint.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13:

Discovery and investigation are ongoing in this matter and BBTI reserves the right (but does not undertake) to supplement these responses as it discovers more information. Subject to the foregoing objections, both general and specific, and without waiving any of them, plaintiff BBTI responds to this interrogatory as follows:

Robert Grant was officially confirmed as BBT Trustee by the GBC in the Spring of 1975 during the annual GBC meetings in Mayapura, West Bengal, India. Defendant Hans Kary attended the GBC meetings and approved the resolution appointing him. Upon information and belief, Ramesvara dasa was previously appointed by Srila Prabhupada as BBT trustee or “acting” BBT trustee some time during the twelve months before the 1975 GBC meetings.

INTERROGATORY NO. 14:

State precisely how ISKCON, Inc. acquired title to the various copyrights registered in the name of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NQ. 14:

Plaintiff BBTI objects to this interrogatory on the ground that it is vague and ambiguous, including specifically and without limitation with regard to the phrases “state precisely”, “acquired title” (which is vague as to what kind of title) and “copyrights” (which is vague in that it does not specify whether it means only federal copyrights under the United States Copyright Act). BBTI objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of any information protected by the attorney-client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. Subject to the foregoing objections, both general and specific, and without waiving any of them, plaintiff BBTI responds to this interrogatory as follows:

ISKCON, Inc. did business under the names “Bhaktivedanta Book Trust” and “BBT” from roughly 1971 until 1976. During the relevant time period (1966 through 1976) Srila

>>> 

WRITTEN RESPONSE BY PLAINTIFF AND CROSS-DEFENDANT BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST

>>>

Prabhupada’s books, including all artwork, glossaries and elaborate purports, were “works for hire” created by ISKCON, Inc. ISKCON, Inc. owned common law copyrights in them from the time they were created, and became the owner of Federal copyrights as soon as they were published with a copyright notice.

BBTI contends that the California trust document dated May 29, 1972 never created a valid trust. However, if it did, and if any of the copyrights ever were owned by that trust, ISKCON, Inc. owned beneficial title to such property because ISKCON, Inc. was the trust beneficiary named in that document.

INTERROGATORY NO. 15:

Identify the owner of the copyrights which were registered in the name of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust the day before ISKCON, Inc. first acquired title to those same copyrights.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15:

BBTI objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of any information protected by the attorney-client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. BBTI further objects to this interrogatory as compound, vague and ambiguous and unintelligible. The interrogatory apparently asks BBTI to identify the person or entity who owned the copyrights, on the day before ISKCON, Inc. acquired title to them, which, at some time or another, were registered in the name of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. Or alternatively, it asks BBTI to identify the person or entity who owned the copyrights, on the day before ISKCON, Inc. acquired title to them, which, at that same time, were registered in the name of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust Or yet alternatively, it asks BBTI to identify the present owner of those copyrights which, on the day before ISKCON, Inc. first acquired title to them, were registered in the name of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. Another alternative meaning, which BBTI rejects as absurd, is that the interrogatory refers to works, the registrations for which were filed on the day before ISKCON Inc. became the owner. BBTI also objects to the  interrogatory on the ground that it appears to be based upon an erroneous assumption that someone other than ISKCON, Inc. owned certain copyrights that

>>>

WRITTEN RESPONSE BY PLAINTIFF AND CROSS-DEFENDANT BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST INTERNATIONAL, INC. TO HANS KARY’S SECOND SET OF SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORY

>>>

INTERROGATORY NO. 18:

State all FACTS on which you base the contention contained in paragraph 41 of your complaint that in July of 1976 Mr. Murphy formally executed assignments transferring ownership of the intellectual property to ISKCON of California, Inc.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 18:

BBTI objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of any information protected by the attorney-client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. Discovery and investigation are ongoing in this matter and BBTI reserves the right (but does not undertake) to supplement these responses as it discovers more information. Subject to the foregoing objections, both general and specific, and without waiving any of them, plaintiff BBTI responds to this interrogatory as follows:

Mr. Murphy recalls formally executing the assignments. BBTI is not certain that this was done in July of 1976 and believes it may have been later that year. Investigation and discovery is ongoing, and BBTI reserves the right (but does not undertake) to supplement this answer later.

INTERROGATORY NO. 19:

State all FACTS on which you base the contention contained in paragraph 41 of the complaint that ISKCON, Inc. either owned outright or owned beneficial title to various copyrights registered in the name of Bhaktivedanta Book Trust.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 19:

BBTI objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of any information protected by the attorney-client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. Discovery and investigation are ongoing in this matter and BBTI reserves the right (but does not undertake) to supplement these responses as it discovers more information. Subject to the foregoing objections, both general and specific, and without waiving any of them, plaintiff BBTI responds to this interrogatory as follows:

BBTI believes that ISKCON, Inc. owned the copyrights outright because the works in question were “works for hire” created by ISKCON, Inc. ISKCON, Inc. supplied the

>>>

WRITTEN RESPONSE BY PLAINTIFF AND CROSS-DEFENDANT BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST INTERNATIONAL INC. TO HANS KARY’S SECOND SET OF SPECIALLY PREPARED INTERROGATORY

>>>

employees who worked on the books with their materials and equipment. ISKCON, Inc. also supplied each of them with room and board and with a stipend for personal or family expenses. Such employees included those who worked in the art department, photography department, Sanskrt editors, Bengali editors, English editors, design and layout specialists, and proof readers, among others.

BBTI contends that the California Trust Agreement dated May 29, 1972 did not create a valid trust and that the book publishing and distribution operations of the Movement were in fact never operated according to the provisions of that document. However, in the event the Court finds that that Trust Agreement created a legally valid trust which at the time in question (i.e., 1976) owned some or all of the copyrights registered at that time in the name Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, ISKCON, Inc. was the beneficiary of that trust, and therefore held beneficial title to those copyrights.

INTERROGATORY NO. 20:

Set forth in detail the authority by which Mr. Murphy acted when he executed assignments transferring ownership of intellectual property to ISKCON of California, Inc. in July of 1976 as alleged in paragraph 41 of your complaint.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 20:

BBTI objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of any information protected by the attorney-client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. Plaintiff BBTI objects to this interrogatory on the ground that it is vague and ambiguous with to the phrases “set forth in detail” and “the authority by which Mr. Murphy acted”. Discovery and investigation are ongoing in this matter and BBTI reserves the right …..

THE END

We like to thank Hansadutta Prabhu
for defending Srila Prabhupada in Court!
Why nobody helped him?

http://hansadutta.com/DOWNLOADS/BBTI_Works-for-Hire-argument.pdf
http://www.iskcon-truth.com/documents/BBTI_Works-for-Hire-argument.pdf

Who is the BBTi ? Who are the members of BBTi ?

Some of the main members of BBTi are as follows: Brahma Muhurta Dasa, Naresvara Dasa, Svavasa Dasa, and Jayadvaita Swami.

In the court settlement it is stated: “Hansadutta Dasa, Veda Guhya Dasa, Bhagavan Dasa, and Dasa Dasanudasa Dasa Dasi have voluntarily stepped down from any role they might have had as trustees of the 1972 trust. And all concerned have agreed that now the (new) trustees (of the BBT) will be four trustees from the BBT-I International: Brahma Muhurta Dasa, Naresvara Dasa, Svavasa Dasa, and Jayadvaita Swami.”

BBTi stolen Copyright Record
Jayadvaita’s BBT takeover attempt
What happened to the BBT ?
Copyrights Transferred to the BBTI ?
BBT and its Shadow, the BBTi
Hansadutta to rescind the BBT settlement agreement
BBT Vs. Hansadutta Court Case Singapore 1992-1996
BBT Doesn’t Need to Prove its Legitimacy
The BBT Trust supersedes ISKCON spiritually and legally
Courting the BBT
BBT Manifesto
BBTI Spends Vast Sums to Hide Court Documents
Who is Joseph Fedorowskey aka Gupta das
How Gupta cheated Hansadutta
Guptas Threatening Demand Letter To BBT Int’l
Ramesvara was NEVER a BBT Trustee
Ramesvara’s testimonial on changing Srila Prabhupada’s books
Ramesvara Interview ISKCON History and Book Changes
Questioning Ramesvara’s complete honesty
5000 Book Changes In The Name Of ‘Editing’
To edit – or not to edit – That Is The Question
Srila Prabhupada on Editing His Books
Srila Prabhupada Instructs Jayadvaita
Iskcon BBTI Copyright Terror Continues
http://www.iskcon-truth.com/articles.html