In response to the distortions and misinformation being circulated around the Internet, as well as in other publications, regarding the three lawsuits with which we are currently involved, we offer the following facts. We are not attempting a comprehensive presentation of these litigations, but simply addressing the more egregious misrepresentations that have been made.

1) We do not regard ourselves as being involved in a "copyright controversy." The copyright is established by law, and our policies merely seek to uphold standard copyright law. We have consistently invited authors to consult with us about copyright and trademark issues and we have granted permission for many publications, both on the Internet and in hard copy, which contain material quoted from the Course. In addition, we have granted copyright permission to many authors who do not agree with our teachings about the Course, and we have been and remain flexible in our approach. It is not our intention, nor would it be consistent with copyright law, to suppress scholarship, discussion or opinion, no matter how divergent from our own views.

2) Endeavor Academy has flagrantly violated copyright law and continues to do so. Endeavor has copied substantial portions of the Course and rearranged it in the pamphlets that they distribute without any comment or discussion of their own. The lawsuit instituted against them by Penguin Books, and later joined by the Foundation for Inner Peace (FIP) and the Foundation for A Course in Miracles (FACIM), was in response to Endeavor's ongoing refusals, despite our repeated requests prior to the suit, to cooperate in adhering to copyright law.

Neither FACIM, FIP or Penguin has ever been accused of using delay as a tactic in the Endeavor lawsuit, nor has there ever been any threat, attempt or motion to charge us with contempt of court. In fact, Endeavor has used delay to prolong the case, allowing time for continuing and very extensive copyright infringement. In addition, we believe Endeavor has orchestrated a campaign using misinformation to discredit both FIP and FACIM, as well as individuals associated with the Foundations, particularly Kenneth.

The issue of Course "authorship" was invented by Endeavor as a defense against charges of copyright infringement. Allegations that Kenneth has been lying about this matter in his court testimony are simply not true. Excerpts taken out of context from that testimony are not sufficient to understand what he has taught for over twenty years, or his testimony itself. The legal issues relate to statutory copyright law and "legal" authorship, not -- as Endeavor and others seek to portray -- matters of faith, or the spiritual source of A Course in Miracles. To understand this question of Jesus and the authorship of A Course in Miracles, interested persons are invited to read chapter 17 in Absence from Felicity (published in 1991), which contains Kenneth's convictions, the expressions of which have certainly evolved, but have never changed.

3) The Circle of Atonement brought legal action against both Foundations (not the other way around). There had been a long history between the Foundations and the Circle, including the Circle's requests to obtain "special" copyright permission. When such special permission was not granted, the Circle continued to publish materials the Foundations believed to contain excessive quotations -- well beyond fair use -- along with the publication of derivative works. In this context, our attorneys finally issued a cease and desist letter to ask the Circle to stop further infringing activity. The Circle of Atonement responded by filing a lawsuit.

As for Robert Perry's recent manuscript, which was submitted to us for copyright approval, it was not approved because it contained an excessive amount of quotations from A Course in Miracles. There is nothing prohibiting Mr. Perry from publishing his book after revising it to comply with standard copyright procedures. Instead of responding by asking for suggestions about how his book might be revised so as to obtain permission to quote from the Course, the Circle filed the lawsuit and Mr. Perry has engaged in a highly public, "open challenge" in his newsletter and on the Internet about copyright matters. We do not now forbid, and never have forbidden Mr. Perry, or anyone else from the Circle of Atonement, from discussing ideas or concepts about A Course in Miracles, nor to teach his or its own understanding of what the Course says. All allegations to the contrary are false.

4) It was announced in early 1999 that the copyright and trademarks for the Course had been transferred to the Foundation for A Course in Miracles. Mr. Ryan Rothgeb received a letter of information about the copyright, which invited cooperation, but he never contacted the Foundation's Director of Publications to request permission, nor did he make any constructive attempt to bring his Web site into compliance with our copyright policies, which are not intended to be as restrictive as has been portrayed. It was only after Mr. Rothgeb established a download site for giving away the electronic version of the Course and supplementary pamphlets that action was taken, under the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, to remove the download site and personal Web site from the Internet. The lawsuit was initiated as required under the law, and as a final recourse, when Mr. Rothgeb misrepresented the truth, continued to announce a download site, and refused to remove infringing material from his Web site.

Moreover, Mr. Rothgeb is not being sued for $11,300,000, as he has claimed. In cases of copyright infringement, the plaintiff must assert a request for damages in the complaint. Our complaint quotes the copyright statute, which provides maximum statutory damages of $20,000 per infringed work, or $100,000 per infringed work if the infringements are "willful."

We hope the foregoing information will help to clarify the facts regarding the copyright litigation that has been misrepresented on the Internet.