What the Bible Business Doesn't Want You to Know

Let's imagine that your pastor gets up one Sunday morning and announces, Alright, it's come to my attention that some of you have been sharing the

Bible with others. Now, I want to applaud that zeal. At the same time, there's a long history of people sharing

God's word in wrong ways, abusing it, changing what it says. And so because of all those reasons and more,

I'm going to have to ask you to come and get permission from me before you share the word of God with others.

Now, if it's just a small portion, that's okay. I'll let you do that for free. However, if it's a larger portion,

I'm going to need you to come vet that by me. And it's going to cost some money because this is a difficult task to steward the word of God.

How would you feel? While that might be unthinkable for a pastor to do, it is exactly what most

Bible publishers have been doing for decades. There are some exceptions, but for the purpose of this video, we'll be focusing on the most popular modern

English translations that most Christians use today. Bible publishers will, of course, argue that they are carefully stewarding

God's word. Let's evaluate that by asking several questions.

Is it legal to copy and share scripture? No, not in any reasonable sense when compared to any other commercial product.

Almost all of the most popular English translations are copyrighted and therefore illegal to freely share.

For example, would it be reasonable to say Harry Potter is legal to share because you can quote parts of it?

Of course not. Some argue that Bible publishers are generous in allowing quotations of scripture up to certain limits, but any commercial work can be quoted in similar ways.

Most countries have fair use or fair dealing exemptions that allow use of a work as long as it is fair, taking into consideration several factors, including how substantial the use is.

So, most people will be able to quote a significant number of verses from Bibles, whether they are granted permission to or not, especially those under a fair use system.

So, while publishers do allow their Bible translations to be quoted up to certain limits, these terms do not go very far beyond what is already permissible under fair use laws, and in many cases are even more restrictive.

The limits are as follows. These limits are more permissive than fair use law in the sense that you are guaranteed to be able to use a certain number of verses, regardless of other factors.

However, not by much. You still can't share a substantial part, such as an entire book, even if it is only 13 verses, like 2

John. More significantly, you can't share plain scripture. Since scripture can only comprise 25 -50 % of a work that you have created, you must always accompany it with other commentary.

Some translations even try to unlawfully deny fair use rights, such as the

ESV. The ESV text may not be quoted in any publication made available to the public by a

Creative Commons license. The ESV may not be translated, in whole or in part, into any other language.

Now, you can legally ignore this claim as long as your use still falls under fair use exemptions.

So, no, scripture is not legal to copy and share in any reasonable sense.

Not because of an oppressive government, but because of Christian publishers.

Now, are publishers generous with permission? No. While they are not all the same, they all make it difficult to get permission, whether it is due to complicated application processes, slow responses, burdensome conditions, charging fees, or simply not granting permission.

The non -commercial permission form for the NIV has 49 fields to fill out, including one for your distribution and marketing strategy.

Crossway allowed the ESV to be used by open source Bible apps for some years, and then suddenly decided to stop and recoup licensing fees.

Several open source Bible apps were then forced to remove it, resulting in these apps receiving very negative reviews from oblivious users.

When I myself contacted Bible publishers for permission for a free app, one took eight months to get back to me, and two didn't respond at all.

Some publishers will not grant permission to apps unless they are truly unique and innovative.

Since users will generally shun apps unless they have their favorite translation, it is very difficult for any new apps to emerge, since it is the publishers who decide if something is truly innovative, rather than the actual users.

Permission is so hard to get that some ministries boast when they have been granted it.

When licensing the NIV for use in Bible commentaries, the publisher forbids any direct criticism of its rendering, which restricts the pursuit of the intended meaning of Scripture.

Reading the entire Bible aloud in a public setting was forbidden by the

American Bible Society for their contemporary English version. Even just reading portions of the

LSB out loud and publishing it as podcast episodes resulted in Pastor Gabriel Hughes being cautioned about copyright.

But really what shut down the Hear the Word of the Lord podcast, at least temporarily, is that I ran into a copyright issue.

I did not know that was going to be a thing, but nonetheless I had to go through the right channels and avenues and try to clear all of that up.

While publishers might seem to be generous about making their translations freely available on certain websites like Bible Gateway, that is actually in part a strategy to increase print sales.

So the more popular your translation is online, the more print sales you'll likely make.

And I've heard this confessed firsthand from those in the industry. I recently made an app that allows anyone to print individual books of the

Bible at home for free. And it was denied permission by all the publishers I asked, except one who demanded money.

And the technology is open source, so they could use it themselves if they wanted to, adding whatever quality assurance they would like, so they would be in control.

But instead, it's clear that publishers do not want ordinary Christians to be able to print

Scripture themselves. They said so explicitly. To quote them, While sites like Bible Gateway allow you to print portions of a book, it maxes out at 10 chapters.

There is also no special license granted for printing. So sharing a printout with anyone else, in many cases, is illegal, even though Christians often do it.

Now, do they commercialize Scripture? Yes. To start with, the clearest offender, the

NKJV, is a 100 % for -profit translation owned by unbelievers.

Job applications for Thomas Nelson simply redirect to its parent company, HarperCollins, which is a secular company and is itself owned by News Corp.

While all the other organizations are non -profit, some of them have given exclusive publishing rights to for -profit companies.

Biblica has given Zondervan exclusive rights in the US to print the

NIV commercially, meaning a significant portion of the profits go to Zondervan's owner, also

News Corp. And no other Christian publisher can print the NIV. Almost all

Bible publishers distribute their translations via the Digital Bible Library, which is quite literally designed to restrict access to God's Word.

It's an initiative by the largest Bible organizations, which requires all its members to acknowledge the following.

Organizations employ various business models, including donation -based models, sales -based models, service delivery models, among others.

All of these models, and hybrid models among them, are considered reasonable and appropriate.

In other words, to be a member of the Digital Bible Library community, you must agree that it's okay to commercialize

Scripture as much as any other member may like. There is not even a requirement to be a non -profit organization.

Even then, the non -profit legal category itself only prevents owners from arbitrarily receiving money from their organization.

But it doesn't take into account personal profiting through high salaries and other compensation.

Whether an organization is non -profit or not, to sell God's Word with exclusive publishing arrangements is to commercialize

Scripture. God's Word has been made a commodity, providing well -paid job security to those who steward it.

Those who labor in producing and updating translations should be financially supported, but many other organizations have managed to achieve that without restricting their translations.

Now, do they ever give for free? Sometimes. As already mentioned, you can find all these translations online for free in certain apps or websites.

However, they usually expect some kind of commercial compensation from the website owner, such as royalty payments or displaying ads for their products.

Ironically, if you want to share God's Word for free, you often have to pay to do so.

Even when publishers do give for free, it is not always really for free.

Every single one of the translations we mentioned earlier collects your personal information when choosing to download their translation for offline use in YouVersion, the most popular

Bible app. Notably, they also collect your name and country, which is not ideal for persecuted

Christians were that data to ever get leaked. Publishers have, in fact, been reluctant to make their translations free online and have been very slow to do so, fearing a drop in print sales.

Not too long ago, many of these translations charged a fee to download them in apps like YouVersion.

During that time in 2011, Biblica and Zondervan made the NIV free to download for a limited time, explicitly as a marketing strategy to generate more print and digital sales.

This limited offer ends next Tuesday. That's when you'll also be able to pick up the

NIV in print at retailers everywhere. We'd like to thank Biblica and Zondervan once again for making the

NIV available offline. Charging fees for offline use in the 2010s was a blatant money -making strategy.

In terms of technology, it would cost less to let people read offline than to have them keep downloading the text from servers.

Publishers forced users to pay for something that would actually decrease distribution expenses.

This was especially greedy in that time, given bandwidth was more limited and mobile payment plans more expensive.

Some publishers, like Biblica and Tyndale, have encouragingly been more open with some of their

Bibles and resources, which is a step in the right direction. However, their most popular

Bible translations remain restricted. Do they actually protect Scripture?

No. While publishers try to protect Scripture through copyright, this is ineffective and does more harm than good.

Copyright more commonly prevents those with good intentions from using Scripture, as those with bad intentions may well ignore the copyright anyway.

Christians generally trust sources of content rather than the copyright status of content.

The KJV is public domain in most countries, and yet malicious modifications have not been a wide problem as there are numerous trustworthy sources of the text.

Even with the current licensing conditions of modern translations, someone could publish blasphemous material as long as Scripture only took up a quarter of the total content.

What publishers do prevent is the sharing of pure Scripture.

None of their public licenses allow copying and sharing plain Scripture. You are always forced to add your own commentary to it.

You can't even share a parable of Jesus by itself, as many oblivious Christians have done without permission over the years.

Fears of bad things happening if people have free access to Scripture is not without historical precedent, as Catholic clergy had the same fears when ordinary believers started to access

Scripture through translations into the vernacular. Henry Knighton, a

Catholic historian, criticized John Wycliffe's translation into English on the grounds that ordinary believers could not be trusted to safeguard

Scripture as clergy could. The Gospel, which Christ gave to the clergy, that they might administer it to the laity, that Master John Wycliffe translated from Latin so that he made that common and open to the laity, and spread the evangelist's pearls to be trampled by swine.

Pope Pius IV in 1584 reluctantly allowed translations in the vernacular, but only if one had written permission from a bishop.

If the Holy Bible translated into the vulgar tongue be indiscriminately allowed to everyone, the rashness of men will cause more evil than good to arise from it.

It is on this point referred to the judgment of the bishops or inquisitors, who may permit the reading of the

Bible translated into the vulgar tongue, and this permission must be had in writing.

Publishers today likewise believe they have been entrusted by God with the task of stewarding

His Word, and that they cannot trust ordinary believers to print or publish it themselves.

Instead, anyone wanting to do so must receive permission from them. To be truly free, all

Bible translations should be public domain, relying on the church to uphold good teaching rather than secular law courts.

However, for the sake of argument, if these organizations really wanted to ensure purity of text, they could make use of the popular

Creative Commons Attribution Non -Commercial No Derivatives License.

This license would mean anyone can freely share scripture as long as they don't modify or commercialize it.

None of these Bible publishers have chosen to make use of it. So, it's entirely fair to conclude that they are not just concerned about purity of text, but rather the control of the text.

As Dr. Maurice Robinson puts it in his 1996 paper, The Bondage of the Word, Copyright and the

Bible, It is not the purity of the text which has to be protected, but the liberation of that text from those non -church entities who desire to profit unjustly from marketing

God's Word back to God's people. Are these publishers really worthy of such control?

I received the following response from a publisher who was concerned that someone might try to make money off their translation.

Were they to let me integrate it into one of my apps? To quote them, I want to add something in the text that we can find if the text you distribute makes it into a commercial venture.

Put your thinking cap on, on what we may do. Maybe we repeat a word in a verse in Ecclesiastes, or we misspell a word in John.

Now, this was for a modern English translation widely trusted by reformed evangelicals.

And I refused to corrupt scripture in that way, and they never ended up giving me the permission

I needed for their text. They obviously didn't intend on changing the meaning of the text, but they were willing to put an intentional mistake into God's Holy Word for the sake of controlling it.

Would God want His Word to be stewarded in this way? No. God's Word is the only tangible thing we have in this world that we can truly call holy.

And yet, we have let it be commercialized. Scripture cannot be chained, yet publishers may well sue you if you try to share it in a way they don't approve.

They call it God's Word, but really believe it belongs to them. A handful of monetization strategists of these organizations decide how millions of believers can and can't use

God's Word. We celebrate smuggling Bibles into hostile countries and yet forbid anyone from copying and sharing scripture with their neighbor.

We say the Reformation put God's Word back into the hands of ordinary believers, but it has once more been taken away by modern day publishers.

Should a believer be allowed to share some of God's Word, but be forbidden from sharing the whole counsel of God?

Should it be lawful to share scripture with commentary, but a crime to share Jesus using just His own words?

You might think this video is aimed towards Bible publishers. It is in fact aimed towards the church.

Commercial publishers have made clear that they think stewarding looks like this and have stubbornly resisted numerous calls for freer access for decades now.

It is instead up to the church to stop promoting these restricted translations to ensure a future where God's Word is free to be shared.

The church must stop turning a blind eye to the commercial nature of these translations and start taking seriously free alternatives.

A future generation of Christians will look back and remember the 21st century as the time when the sharing of God's Word was restricted by Christians themselves, and it was called godly.

Even more perplexing will be why churches allowed it to happen in the first place.

It is most fitting to end this video in the words of the translations themselves.

Unlike so many, we do not peddle the Word of God.

Instead, we speak with sincerity in Christ as from God and before God.

If this video has convicted you of the need for Scripture to be free, please consider signing the statement linked below.