© 2003 VNN
|
EDITORIAL   Why Perpetuate The Grief? BY BHIMA DAS EDITORIAL, May 29 (VNN) — A response to Akruranath's "Challenge to Hansadutta" You were in a debate (very expensive debate), and you lost it. Or else why did BBTI spend so much money for lawyers, give away so much money in settlement, and give away a publishing license? Because they realised what a nice guy Hansadutta really is? Now you come back and say, "We should have, could have, would have won the case", BUT YOU DID NOT win the case, so what is the use of saying "in my opinion" and "undoubtedly" or "I imagine"? SHOULD'VE, COULD'VE, WOULD'VE. DIDDA, DADDA, DUTTA. You were sent to the sidelines when it became clear to ISKCON and BBTI that the case was lost, and that it was costing them too much money. If the card was in your hand to win the case, why didn't you? But you led BBTI on a costly fishing expedition. You deposed Hansadutta for 6 days (video-taped) at a cost of at least $20,000-$30,000to BBTI, and one of your very expensive questions was: "Is it not true, Mr. Kary, that your favorite color is black?" His reply? "Well, Krishna is black, and so I guess it is my favorite color." It was good for a laugh, but not law. BBTI woke up to the absurdity and the enormity of the cost. One BBTI resolution dated sometime shortly after the settlement notes a decision to contest your over-the-top fees through legal arbitration. Why, Akruranath, do you perpetuate your fantasy? Why are you so bent on sticking to a story, even when documented facts contradict you? In 1974, Srila Prabhupada named Hansadutta as trustee for The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust in a legally binding resolution dated and worded thus: ---QUOTE--- BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST RESOLUTION The written resignation of Kelly Gifford Smith (Karandhara das Adhikari) is hereby accepted by the trustees of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. Hans Kary (Hamsaduta das Adhikari) is hereby appointed as a Bhaktivedanta Book Trust trustee to replace Kelly Smith. Resolved this 15th day of September, 1974; A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami [signature appears on original] William Berke (Bali Mardan das Adhikari) ---END QUOTE--- So now, Akruranath, PLEASE PRODUCE A COPY OF THE BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST RESOLUTION THAT LEGALLY REMOVED HANSADUTTA FROM HIS TRUSTEE POSITION. Or, alternatively, produce a copy of the judicial order that legally removed him. Or produce a copy of Hansadutta's resignation. NOTE: ISKCON GBC resolution, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International, Inc. resolution not acceptable, as these are separate legal entities that had no legal authority or control over the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. You say that he was long ago removed. But he was only ever removed from ISKCON GBC, not from BBT, not until his resignation in November 1998 upon signing the settlement agreement with ISKCON/BBTI. ISKCON GBC had no legal authority over Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. Srila Prabhupada made certain of that in his written declaration of trust, a legal document named "Bhaktivedanta Book Trust Agreement", dated May 29, 1972: -- ---QUOTE [cited, III. Purpose of Trust, Paragraph 1]--- This trust shall exist independently of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness and the Trustees' functions an duties stated herein shall be separate and not dependent on the Governing Body Commission of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. ---END QUOTE--- You deny crafting the legal ploy of declaring that Srila Prabhupada never owned the copyrights to his books and that they were "works for hire", but your name and that of your law firm appear on the legal documents that testify to it. Too bad those documents are 'under seal' so we are not at liberty to produce them here, but the declaration was widely publicised on the internet prior to settlement in discussions that took place on ISKCON.com and VNN. You further say that you see nothing wrong in saying that Srila Prabhupada's books, including all artwork, glossaries and elaborate purports, were "'works for hire' created by ISKCON, Inc" and that Srila Prabhupada never owned them. Moreover, that "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." This argument directly contradicts Srila Prabhupada's own words in the trust deed re funding of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. How is it not demeaning Srila Prabhupada, to suggest that he, ISKCON's Founder-Acharya and supreme authority, pure devotee and spiritual master, was the hired worker of ISKCON, subordinate to ISKCON? Do you also see nothing wrong with your plea for a court declaration that Srila Prabhupada's BBT NEVER EXISTED, WAS LEGALLY INVALID AND NEVER THE OWNER OF THE COPYRIGHTS to Srila Prabhupada's books? WAS NOT THIS COURTCASE A DIRECT ATTACK AGAINST THE VERY BHAKTIVEDANTA BOOK TRUST CREATED BY SRILA PRABHUPADA HIMSELF? How can this not be regarded as offensive? At the very least, a grave mistake on the part of lead counsel, Adam R. Bernstein, yourself. Ultimately, BBT International, Inc. and ISKCON abandoned the argument and admitted that Srila Prabhupada's Bhaktivedanta Book Trust created May 29, 1972, DID EXIST, AND DID HOLD THE LEGAL COPYRIGHTS to Srila Prabhupada's books even up to the time of the joint statement "BBT Legal Case Ends" issued by Gupta and Jayadvaita following the settlement in November 1998: -- ---QUOTE--- The agreement reaffirms the validity of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust formed by Srila Prabhupada on May 29, 1972. This was a legal California trust into which Srila Prabhupada conveyed the copyrights to his books. All sides agree that this trust is still legal and alive, and that it is the true owner of Srila Prabhupada's copyrights, as Srila Prabhupada desired. ---END QUOTE--- You have never spoken to the devotees who distributed Srila Prabhupada's books in Malaysia and Singapore under the auspices of Prabhupada Yoga Meditation Centre (PYMC), so you can HONESTLY say that you DON'T KNOW what precipitated their publication of the Chinese Bhagavad-gita. If you are unwilling to accept our explanation for it, that is your fault, not ours. It is widely known and since acknowledged by BBTI and ISKCON, that BBTI and ISKCON did set a policy to deliberately refuse to sell BBT books to devotees outside ISKCON. This policy was reversed almost immediately after the settlement of the BBT courtcase in 1998, and Jayadvaita's announcement appeared here on VNN. If BBTI had not taken such drastic measures to prevent us from buying books, perhaps none of this would have happened. But to their shame, BBT Malaysia refused to sell to us, BBT Australia also refused to sell to us, BBT India also refused to sell to us. Niscintya did sell to us, under the table, bless his little heart, but he had no Chinese books. Moreover, ISKCON Malaysia and Singapore engaged in a vigorous campaign to shut us down. Now, it's over and done. So why are you beating a dead donkey?? Is anyone going to pay you to resurrect the dead? Why do you obscure the facts with your fallible suppositions? Why do you perpetuate the grief by calling us liars? Why do you mislead devotees to believe that we started it all, and that BBTI was merely responding? Au contraire, Monsieur. It was Hansadutta who upheld the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust against attack by BBTI and ISKCON, who had long since deserted and by-passed the actual BBT by illegally converting the trust assets, Srila Prabhupada's copyrights, into a business corporation. Your response to Hansadutta's article "Just What Is Jayadvaita's Point?" has missed the point altogether. Perhaps you could not come up with legitimate arguments, and so resorted to this feeble attempt to discredit Hansadutta and ourselves. Right or wrong, there is a large contingent of devotees who want only Srila Prabhupada's unrevised books, and who are very unhappy with the changes and will not in good conscience distribute them. ALL JAYADVAITA'S JUSTIFICATIONS DO NOT AMOUNT TO AUTHORISATION FROM SRILA PRABHUPADA TO CHANGE EDITIONS TO WHICH SRILA PRABHUPADA HAD GIVEN HIS EXPRESS APPROVAL. BBTI's failure to respond by making the original pre-1978 books available has resulted in piracy. We see that it has happened already and going on. Closing the eyes doesn't make the trouble go away. Are court cases the answer? We don't believe so. Undoubtedly, BBTI should take action, but will it be the right action this time? WHAT WOULD SRILA PRABHUPADA DO? Related VNN Stories Contact VNN about this storySend this story to a friend
NEWS DESK | EDITORIALS | TOP |
