Church teaching on torrenting?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AlanLeo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fauken said:
I’m not. The Church defines what theft is.
40.png
AlanLeo:
Look, I admit that intuitively it seems very much like theft, but when I actually think about I can’t really justify labelling it theft.
Click to expand...
Then here’s a different perspective. I’m a software developer. I’ve been coding since high school, went to college for years, and spent more years working professionally to make good software. The software I use to make software in costs $500 alone, and that’s just one of my tools. Not to mention that it gets updated every two years, so occasionally, it gets upgraded. And we haven’t even discussed my payment yet.

Depending on what it is I make, it can take a few weeks to several months, or even years. I could be the only developer on the project, or there could be several of us. My employer makes money off of licensing what I create, which ultimately ends up in my pocket. So I don’t like it then when people rip my software and share it on the internet for others to use, and not pay me for it. I put good, honest labor into it, and just because it’s not tangible, doesn’t mean it’s any less theft. I am being denied proper payment for my work.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I hope I didn’t cause too much offense since it’s a more personal topic in your case. That being said let’s not forget that these popular movies are made by actual trillionaires, so when it’s at that level I’m not as inclined towards paying as I would be in your case lol.
MNathaniel said:
It sounds like you’re not thinking of yourself as a potential customer who would otherwise be paying the producers for these things if you weren’t getting them for free from thieves.

A consideration you might not have thought of:

What if you just went without?

I mean literally. What might the side effects be if you committed to NEVER torrenting/downloading your entertainment in a way that is free for you but not what the creators intended? …
Click to expand...
I really appreciate this comment and that you took your time to write it, it contains the thoughts that I encountered when I read about Pope Leo XIII’s social teaching which drew me to Catholicism in the first place; the objections to the rotten fruits of mass consumption/production (also urbanization but that isn’t relevant to this topic) as a consequence of industrialization. I guess it’s not so easy to navigate yourself morally in this digitalized world. Generally speaking most people are simply consumed by it and some abandon it altogether, it seems very difficult to find a harmony or balance nowadays.
 
AlanLeo said:
Fair enough, I hope I didn’t cause too much offense since it’s a more personal topic in your case. That being said let’s not forget that these popular movies are made by actual trillionaires, so when it’s at that level I’m not as inclined towards paying as I would be in your case lol.
Click to expand...
Those trillionares hire people like me. Pirating affects my bottom line far more than it does theirs.
 
If the artists in the Marshall Islands do not have protection for their work, I’m going to imagine they have very few professionals in the arts.

This does not mean that residents of the Marshall Islands are free to break the law in the US, nor that their taking art is not wrong.
 
TheLittleLady said:
This does not mean that residents of the Marshall Islands are free to break the law in the US, nor that their taking art is not wrong.
Click to expand...
The first question would be if the US law is enforceable towards someone in the Marshall Islands. Copyright does not exist by natural law, it is statutory. It is a complicated legal issue which jurisdictions one should pay respect to, but the law of the residency is obviously relevant.
 
It might be worth reviewing the Catechism on the Universal Destination of Goods, and see if it can be applied to intellectual property. I don’t have time to do that right now, but OP feel free to look into it.
 
Beryllos said:
It might be worth reviewing the Catechism on the Universal Destination of Goods, and see if it can be applied to intellectual property. I don’t have time to do that right now, but OP feel free to look into it.
Click to expand...
Thank you! Will do.
 
Without a positive law, you couldn’t rely on the exclusive right to make copies for a limited time, enforced by the state. You would have to use instruments that exist in natural law, like employment or other contracts.
 
As no person needs the latest Avenger film to live, and IP is not goods, how could UDG apply?
 
I tend to agree. I didn’t say no because I wanted to think about whether there can be any benefit to those in need or to the common good.

For example, someone might illegally copy a bit of software, like an algorithm, and use it to create some new software to benefit humanity. However, there usually are legal alternatives, like getting permission or licensing the intellectual property, or creating an equivalent algorithm from scratch.

Yep. So far I’m not seeing universal destination as a justification for copying or sharing copyrighted material.
 
Last edited:
Depriving workers of their just wages is a sin crying out to Heaven for justice. Transgressing just civil laws is a sin against the Fourth Commandment.
 
The Universal Destination of Goods does not apply here because the good in question is not necessary for survival under any circumstance.
 
mythbuster1 said:
The Universal Destination of Goods does not apply here because the good in question is not necessary for survival under any circumstance.
Click to expand...
Necessity for survival is sufficient reason, and is specifically mentioned in CCC 2408. However, the preceding paragraphs 2401-2407 describe universal destination more generally in terms of the common good.
 
TheLittleLady said:
and IP is not goods
Click to expand...
I gave this a bit more thought, and I cannot agree. Like many material goods, e.g., farm produce or clothing, IP is made by human effort using God-given resources.

Additionally, much of what the Catechism says about universal destination of goods seems equally applicable to the product of human creativity. Consider, for example, science and technology that make it possible to grow more food for the world.

I would agree that many copyrighted items, like movies and games, do not promote the common good or individual good, and so do not come under the universal destination of goods.
 
Last edited:
Oh, well if you currently live in the Marshall Islands it’s not a problem for you is it?

But if you don’t live there, you cannot use their laws as an example and say “why not?”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top