Law Offices



McAfee & Taft



A Professional Corporation



10th Floor, Two Leadership Square

211 North Robinson

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102-7103

(405) 235-9621

Fax (405) 235-0439




Ross A. Plourde

Writer direct

(405) 552-2277

Fax (405) 228-7477


October 29, 1999






Urantia Foundation

533 West Diversey Parkway

Chicago, Illinois  60614

Re:            Jesus – A New Revelation


Your letter of October 13, 1999 to Harry McMullan has been referred to me.  I represent Michael Foundation, the entity that has published Jesus – A New Revelation.  Your letter directed to Mr. McMullan should have been directed to him in his role as President of the Michael Foundation and I am therefore responding on behalf of the Foundation.


Nature of a “composite work.”


You refer in your letter to the Maaherra case. Michael Foundation carefully studied the evidence presented in that case before deciding to publish Jesus – A New Revelation.  An important issue to bear in mind in determining the copyrightability of the material in Jesus – A New Revelation is the nature of the copyright you were left with as a result of the 9th Circuit ruling. As you know, the court found that you were the proprietor of a “composite work.” By definition, the process of creating a composite work presumes that the creator began with certain “building blocks” consisting of original works by others.  The compiler of a composite work is not entitled, merely because he compiled the composite work, to claim copyright as to the original works by others – the building blocks with which the compiler started.


Urantia Foundation admissions that no human sources were involved


Your copyright was affirmed only because of supposed human input in its creation. We are confident that a future court will not ignore the direct evidence of your own testimony to the effect that no human sources were involved; for example:


1.      The History of the Urantia Papers, a document you attributed to Dr. Sadler, and on which you relied, after describing the process by which papers were received, states that the contact commission “had no editorial authority. [Its] job was limited to spelling, capitalization, and punctuation.”


2.      “I can categorically assure you that no humans decided the content of the Urantia Book. The Book is as the revelators gave it to us.” (Emma Christensen, contact commissioner and trustee of Urantia Foundation)


3.      “The Urantia Book was not written by Urantia Foundation. It is a revelation given to this world by superhuman personalities.” (Emma Christensen)


4.      The Urantia Book was published precisely as it was given to the people of this planet. Not a word has been added or deleted.” (Emma Christensen)


5.      “No human scholars edited the book.” (Emma Christensen)


6.      “The Urantia Book is arranged and assembled exactly as revealed.” “No human ever edited this material.” (Thomas Kendall, Urantia Foundation trustee)


7.      Further, in your own responses to Requests for Admissions, Urantia Foundation is on record admitting “no human being wrote any portion of the text of the Papers.”


It would serve no useful purpose to continue to recount the mass of relevant evidence developed in the Maaherra case in this case, all of which indicates that no human creativity was associated with the formation of the text of the Urantia Book, which of course includes the material contained in Jesus – A New Revelation.


Singular origin of Part IV


The court ruled that your copyright in the entire book does not extend to any single "revelation" contained in the Urantia Book – i.e., any portion of the book to which no human creativity was applied.  With respect to the court’s ruling that a particular revelation in the Urantia Book is not copyrightable, the aforementioned History of the Urantia Movement is most illuminating.  It states, “What has just been recorded refers more particularly to Parts I, II, and III of the Urantia Book.  Part IV – The Jesus Papers had a little different origin.  They were produced by a midwayer commission and were completed one year later than the other Papers. The first three parts were completed and certified to us in A.D. 1934.  The Jesus Papers were not so delivered to us until 1935.”


Moreover, we have in our possession an affidavit from an individual to the effect that Wm. Sadler, Jr. personally told him on several occasions that the entire Part IV arrived at the same time, already typed, and that no changes were made.  The forum question and answer process was not involved in Part IV.


In publishing Jesus – A New Revelation, Michael Foundation firmly believed, and still believes, that the contents of that book constitute a single revelationalbeit a large oneunadulterated by human input. The testimony is clear that even if the remainder of the Urantia Book is copyrightable, the material in Part IV constitutes a “single revelation” not subject to copyright.


Adulterations of the text of the Urantia Book by “human creativity”


Michael Foundation has no interest whatsoever in publishing anything other than the fifth epochal revelation. To Michael Foundation, what you are calling “human creativity” (by any alleged predecessors in interest of Urantia Foundation, Urantia Foundation itself, or anyone else) is nothing more than an adulteration of the true text as it was given.  Rest assured that of all people or entities, Michael Foundation is most interested in knowing where (if anywhere) in the text of Part IV such adulterations might exist, so that in a subsequent edition Michael Foundation may edit them out and bring the true fifth epochal revelation to the world.


In printing Jesus—A New Revelation, Michael Foundation has relied on your own testimony to the effect that no human input was involved  It was Urantia Foundation that made the above-quoted statements to the effect that the entire book is an unadulterated revelation, not Michael Foundation.  Therefore, we feel that Michael Foundation is entitled to continue to rely on your statements and admissions until such time as we are presented with credible evidence (not merely general assertions that human beings were involved in the process) that establishes the following:


1.                  The precise words that were added, deleted or changed from the original revelation;

2.                  The  precise changes that were made in the order of the original revelations;

3.                  The persons who made the changes; and

4.                  When the changes were made.


Of course, any such evidence must be considered in light of the testimony and statements of those past trustees who were physically present at the time the revelation was given, such as those cited above.  Nevertheless, if we are convinced that any changes you identify are actually changes by you or your predecessors, Michael Foundation will make haste to delete your changes in the revealed text so as to conform with the genuine uncopyrightable revelation.




Ross A. Plourde




cc:        Michael Foundation

            3333 South Council

            Oklahoma City, Oklahoma  73179