Page:Urantia Foundation v. Maaherra (D. Ariz. 1995).pdf/21

 to Rule 56(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The defendant, Kristen Maaherra, asserts that the plaintiff’s copyright in The URANTIAUrantia [sic] Book is invalid and thus her copying of the book’s text is not prohibited.

The plaintiff, Urantia Foundation, brought this action in part to enjoin the defendant from infringing its copyright to The URANTIAUrantia [sic] Book. The defendant essentially admits the actions alleged by the plaintiff, but contends that the plaintiff’s copyright renewal in the book is invalid. Consequently, the defendant asserts a counterclaim for declaratory judgment and requests that the plaintiff’s copyright renewal in The URANTIAUrantia [sic] Book be declared void. The motion for summary judgment is to be decided under the copyright law as it existed under the Copyright Act of 1909.

The genesis of the instant case can be traced back nearly a century. Early in the twentieth century a Chicago physician by the name of William S. Sadler, Sr. was confronted by an individual with extraordinary talents. This individual became a patient of Dr. Sadler’s and was studied by him for over eighteen years. During this time the patient communicated numerous and sundry messages, initially to Dr. Sadler and, later, to a small group. The court believes Dr. Sadler made reference to these messages in the appendix to a book he wrote in 1929. "The communications which have been written, or which we have had the opportunity to hear spoken, are made by a vast order of alleged beings who claim to come from other planets to visit this world, to stop here as student visitors for study and observation when they are en route from one universe to another or from one planet to another. These communications further arise in alleged spiritual beings who purport to have been assigned to this planet for duties of various sorts."

(Def.’s Reply Br. in Supp. of Def.’s Mot. for Partial Summ. J.App. III at 383.) Dr. Sadler concluded the aforementioned appendix by stating, “Our investigations are being continued and … I hope some time in the near future to secure permission for the more complete reporting of the phenomena connected with this interesting case.” Id. at 384.

There is no proof that the patient Dr. Sadler mentioned in his book is the “Contact Personality” to which the parties in the instant case refer; nor is it of particular importance in deciding the motion currently before me. I quote the passage simply because it depicts the generally agreed upon events that help to explain the origin of the “Urantia Papers.”

As the “Urantia Papers” came into existence through the Contact Personality, Dr. Sadler and his initial followers assumed certain responsibilities. They “work[ed] directly with the contact personality in the production of the text of the Urantia Papers providing feedback and receiving instructions regarding the disposition of the Papers.” (Pl.’s Resp. to Def.’s Req. for Admis. at 25–26.) [hereinafter Pl.’s Admis.] Subsequently, a larger group of individuals was invited to participate in this unique experience.