prophet said:
We sometimes confuse U.S. Copyright law with GBr's granted permission to publish.
The Crown granted both Oxford and Cambridge Universities the authority to print the AV.
Neither universty owns the ideas/words contained within, obviously, by default, because there are 2.
In a Monarchy, one must have permission, after all.
In the U.S. of course, a copyright recognizes ownership, rather than merely granting permission to print.
The actual fact is that the KJV had what amounted to the copyright of that day. The copyright of that day existed more for the government and for the benefit of printers than for the authors or translators. John Tebbel wrote: “There had been a copyright of sorts in England from 1518†(History of Book Publishing, p. 46).
James Paterson pointed out:
“The Crown and the patentees of the Crown have sometimes set up rights more or less amounting to a perpetual copyright, and sometimes resembling a monopoly†(
Liberty of the Press, p. 282). Paterson maintained that “courts have expressed confused views as to the origin of these exceptional rights†(Ibid.). These rights are sometimes referred to as “
the prerogative copyrights of the Crown of England.†Walter Copinger noted that judges “have given it as their opinion, that the prerogative is founded on the circumstance of the translation of the Bible having been actually paid for by King James, and its having thus
became the property of the Crown†(
Law of Copyright, pp. 262-263). Likewise, John Shortt pointed out that “Lord Mansfield regarded it as a mere right of property founded on the purchase of the translation by the King in the time of James I†(The Law, p. 48). George Curtis wrote: “Sir William Blackstone says, that the claim of the king to the exclusive printing of the English Bible rests upon the two grounds of original purchase, and of his being the head of the Church. Lord Mansfield held it to be a mere right of property, the king having bought the translation. The translation which the king was supposed to have bought, or to have had printed at his own expense, was that executed in the reign and under the superintendence of King James I†(
Treatise on the Law of Copyright, pp. 117-118).
Robert Sargent, a KJV-only advocate, noted that Robert Barker paid 3,500 pounds for the copyright of the KJV and that Barker's firm held the rights to print the KJV until 1709 (English Bible: Manuscript Evidence, p. 226). The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church also pointed out that Robert Barker bought the final manuscript of the KJV (now lost) for 3,500 pounds, "which included the copyright" (p. 135). Donald Brake asserted: “In 1610 Barker had paid 3,500 pounds for exclusive printing rights for the King James Version†(Visual History of KJB, p. 163). W. H. T. Wrede noted that Cantrell Legge, printer at Cambridge, attempted to print the 1611 KJV in 1614, but Robert Baker “claimed the sole right of Bible printing under his Patent†and prevented him from printing it (Short History, pp. 5-6). Allister McGrath observed that "Barker was obliged to hand over the copyright to Bonham Norton in 1617 as financial security" and only regained control of it in 1629 (In The Beginning, p. 199). Barker would end up in prison for debt. Christopher Anderson quoted William Ball as writing in 1651 the following: “I conceive the sole printing of the Bible and Testament with power of restraint in others, to be of right the propriety of one Matthew Barker, citizen and stationer of London, in regard that his father paid for the amended or corrected Translation of the Bible 3500 [pounds]: by reason whereof the translated copy did of right belong to him and his assignees†(Annals, II, p. 384).
Theodore Letis, a defender of the Textus Receptus, wrote: "This Bible [the KJV] had the Cum Privilegio ("with privilege") printed on it which meant that
the Crown of England, as the official head of the state church, held the copyright to this Bible, giving permission only to those printers which the Crown had chosen" (
Revival of the Ecclesiastical Text and the Claims of the Anabaptists, p. 29). This “Cum pivilegio†is found on the title page for the New Testament in the 1611 edition, but it is found on the title page for the whole Bible in later KJV editions printed in 1613, 1614, 1615, 1617, 1618. 1619, etc. David Cloud maintained that “the King James Bible was produced under the direct authority of the British Crown and is owned and ’copyrighted’ by the crown of England†(Faith, p. 584).
