Newsroom posts lawsuit filing that rebuts Dehlin’s claim over use of “Mormon”.

[Calm]

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/getting-it-right-clarifying-trademark-branding-concerns

Quote

To help ensure the public understands the facts and the Church’s position in this case, the opening paragraph of the Church’s filing is included below:

This case is not about silencing criticism. The Church’s claims do not target the content of Defendants’ speech at all. Nor is it about ownership or control of the word Mormon. The Church made this clear in its Complaint. Rather, this case is about eliminating the confusion caused by Defendants’ mimicking the Church’s trademarks and using its copyrighted images without permission. Mr. Dehlin can criticize the Church as he chooses, and he can use Mormon in connection with his podcast. But federal law prohibits Defendants from pilfering the Church’s copyrighted images or using its trademarks in ways that are likely to cause people to believe that Defendants or their content are associated with the Church. The First Amendment protects Defendants’ speech; it does not license them to appropriate the Church’s marks and images.

Not sure what his current stance is, but from June:

Quote

 

“The LDS church does not own the word ‘Mormon’, and it should not be allowed to use intellectual property law to control how people discuss Mormon culture, history, doctrine or lived experience,” said Dehlin. “This case raises important questions that extend well beyond [the] Mormon Stories podcast.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/28/lds-church-mormon-lawsuit

Edited 3 hours ago by Calm

[Calm]

Not sure I understand this part:

Quote

 

Why now?

Public questions and ongoing confusion about whether “Mormon Stories” is official Church content made it necessary to act.

The ongoing confusion has been since it started from what I have seen.  Maybe they mean something specific by “public questions”?

[Calm]

Trib:

Quote

The show’s logos, fonts, images, color schemes and “other branding” — in combination with its use of “Mormon” in its title — are enough, the church’s attorneys argue, to confuse some into thinking the podcast represents an official product of the global faith.

“This is intentional,” reads the filing, citing an instance in a 2022 episode in which a guest informed host John Dehlin he began listening because he believed it was put out by the church.

The filing describes the podcast host as responding by saying, “‘That was not why I named it that’” before adding, “‘OK, maybe it was a little bit why I named it that.’’’

Not the first time he shot himself in the foot, imo.  
 

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2026/08/20/lds-church-rejects-notion-its-case/

The Trib has the filing embedded.  Can read it on Scribd as well apparently.

Edited 3 hours ago by Calm

[Calm]

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2026/08/12/aclu-tells-court-toss-out-lds/

Quote

That argument now has the backing of the ACLU and the EFF, which, along with Dehlin, center their arguments on the question of who legally has a right to the “Mormon” name and when.