067
In the last issue, we printed a letter from Professor Elisha Qimron of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev regarding the lawsuit he has brought against BAR and its editor (“Letters on the Qimron Lawsuit Against BAS,” BAR 18:04). Professor Qimron is claiming over $200,000 in damages because we printed a photocopy of a page from a Polish publication that contained a Hebrew transcription of MMT, a much-discussed Dead Sea Scroll fragment that has still not been officially published more than 35 years after it was discovered. Professor Qimron contends that we infringed his copyright by printing a photocopy of his transcription of MMT in our two-volume set of photographs of unpublished Dead Sea Scroll fragments.
In his letter, Professor Qimron argues that we inaccurately described his legal claim “as if it were against ‘intellectual freedom’ and the freedom to publish.” His claim, he says, only relates to one page in the two-volume set. Eliminate the one page that contains his transcription of MMT and he has no objection to our selling the set of photographs.
True enough. But the one page to which he objects very directly involves intellectual freedom and the freedom to publish.
Professor Qimron and John Strugnell (who has not joined in Qimron’s lawsuit) put together the fragments of MMT, which they plan to publish soon, together with an English translation and a 300-page commentary on the 120-line text. Professor Qimron claims that the arduous task of arranging the pieces of the six copies of MMT gives him (and presumably Strugnell) the exclusive copyright on this 2,000-year-old text.
If Professor Qimron is right, it is hard to imagine a more serious obstacle to research on, and dissemination of, ancient texts. And this surely involves intellectual freedom.
Here’s why: If Professor Qimron is correct that he owns the copyright on the Hebrew transcription to this text, then he has the exclusive right to publish it, not only before his commentary appears but after its publication as well. His copyright will last for life plus 50 years. During that period, no one will be able to publish a Hebrew transcription of the text, except by Professor Qimron’s leave or by leave of his heirs.
Remember that we did not publish Professor Qimron’s English translation of the Hebrew text, even though it was published in the Polish journal. We printed only the Hebrew letters that appeared on the ancient fragments, plus the letters that had not survived but that were reconstructed by Professor Qimron. In short, the author of the text was the ancient writer, not Professor Qimron.
If Professor Qimron were the author of the text, he would, it is true, be entitled to copyright the text, and no one could copy it either before or after his publication except with his permission. But he did not compose this text. It was written by someone else over 2,000 years ago. At most, he filled in letters that had not survived.
We have just been preparing for publication a discussion of another Dead Sea Scroll text that is as difficult to read as MMT. It is interesting because of some fascinating parallels to the beatitudes in Matthew’s Gospel. In the case of the Qumran beatitudes, however, they have now been published by Emil Puech of the École Biblique. If Professor Qimron prevails in his lawsuit against BAR, however, we won’t be able to print this text without the permission of the scholar who transcribed and reconstructed the ancient text.
Or consider the plaster fragments found some years ago at Deir Alla in Jordan, which mention the prophet Baalam and date to about the eighth century B.C. Scholars have been arguing for years about how to arrange these fragments and how to reconstruct the 070missing parts. But if Professor Qimron is correct, scholars will need to obtain permission before publishing an earlier reconstruction beside their own. If there is bad blood between them or if there are political differences between them, permission may be refused. Imagine what this will do to scholarly research.
But this is not all. If Professor Qimron is right, he will own the copyright in the Hebrew text of MMT. The copyright owner has the right to control translations of his work. Thus, no one will be able to translate MMT—into English, French, German or any other language—without Professor Qimron’s permission, even after he publishes the Hebrew text. Can this really be the law?
If Professor Qimron should win this lawsuit, every scholar who pieces together an ancient manuscript and reconstructs it will have a copyright in it. No one will be able to copy it or translate it, except by leave of that scholar or his/her heirs. The same will be true of ancient works of art, like mosaics, since they too are entitled to copyright by their creators. No one will even be able to take a picture of a reconstructed mosaic without first obtaining permission of the scholar who reconstructed it.
So, yes, Professor Qimron, your lawsuit does involve intellectual freedom and freedom to publish, even though it objects only to one page in our two-volume set and even though you do not object to our publishing the photographs of the hitherto unpublished Dead Sea Scroll fragments. For the inevitable result of your copyright argument is that the copyright owner would control publication of a transcript of an ancient text and its translation into modern languages both before and after publication—at least for the life of the transcriber, plus 50 years.
If anything is worse than refusing to allow the public to see the photographs of the fragments, it is giving exclusive rights in a transcription of the ancient text to the scholar who transcribes it.
Our pages are open, Professor Qimron, for you to tell us otherwise if you feel we are wrong.
In the last issue, we printed a letter from Professor Elisha Qimron of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev regarding the lawsuit he has brought against BAR and its editor (“Letters on the Qimron Lawsuit Against BAS,” BAR 18:04). Professor Qimron is claiming over $200,000 in damages because we printed a photocopy of a page from a Polish publication that contained a Hebrew transcription of MMT, a much-discussed Dead Sea Scroll fragment that has still not been officially published more than 35 years after it was discovered. Professor Qimron contends that we infringed his copyright by printing a photocopy of […]
