Publisher's Synopsis
Two different Federal appeals courts (with three judge panels) ruled that Self-Realization Fellowship's copyright control of Yogananda's magazines came under the provisions of the 1909 US Copyright Act. The first ruling was 1995 (https: //openjurist.org/206/f3d/1322/self-realization-v-ananda) and the second was 2000 (https: //openjurist.org/206/f3d/1322/self-realization-v-ananda). In fact both SRF, Inc. and the defendant Ananda Church of Self-Realization argued their cases on the common agreement that all Yogananda's works were subject to the 1909 US Copyright Law.In 2002 the jury upheld the Federal Judges' previous decisions, only acknowledging that SRF, Inc. had copyright control and ownership over the series of 9 magazine articles in which Yogananda's commentaries on scriptures were serially published. This Volume is offered in the hope that many people will enjoy once again the insight provided in the essays contained herein. It is presented under the SRF, Inc. assumption in their lawsuit that these articles are governed by the 1909 US Copyright Law provisions. Their assumption having been so argued in court, then this series of new looks at old issues may be done both ethically and legally.Without changing any of Yogananda's words, Castellano-Hoyt presents a new look at Volume VI, No 10 of August, 1934.
