Filesharing Christian Music Immoral/Unethical?

  • Thread starter Thread starter baggins321
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

baggins321

Guest
Does anyone know the Catholic Church’s teaching on filesharing in regards to the Christian genre specifically? I mean, wouldn’t it fall under the category of a body of knowledge, something that should be freely acquired by all since it’s promoting God’s teachings on faith and morality?
Doesn’t it say somewhere in scripture that everything in the heavens and on earth belongs to God, so what right do people have to sell Christian music in the first place then? Selling music the way it is sold nowadays is only a recent phenomenon anyways.
I suppose it’s worth adding - it would be perfectly legal to get any copy of the bible written prior to 1923 and stick it on a filesharing network. It’s only recent laws made in the name of money that changes that.
Now I think if Christ were here and found these Christian artists wanting you to buy their product, he would be upset that some one is trying to make a profit off of him. I really do belive this, the word of God and Christ should be free, is this not the way Christianity started?
 
40.png
baggins321:
Does anyone know the Catholic Church’s teaching on filesharing in regards to the Christian genre specifically? I mean, wouldn’t it fall under the category of a body of knowledge, something that should be freely acquired by all since it’s promoting God’s teachings on faith and morality?
Doesn’t it say somewhere in scripture that everything in the heavens and on earth belongs to God, so what right do people have to sell Christian music in the first place then? Selling music the way it is sold nowadays is only a recent phenomenon anyways.
I suppose it’s worth adding - it would be perfectly legal to get any copy of the bible written prior to 1923 and stick it on a filesharing network. It’s only recent laws made in the name of money that changes that.
Now I think if Christ were here and found these Christian artists wanting you to buy their product, he would be upset that some one is trying to make a profit off of him. I really do belive this, the word of God and Christ should be free, is this not the way Christianity started?
Click to expand...
As a first response, this issue would be covered by the fact that we have a responsibility to honor the laws of whatever country we live in, insofar as they do not command us to do something immoral. It is easy enough for Christian artists and writers to distribute their work in such a way that it can be freely distributed by others. Those that choose to take advantage of the existing copyright laws have the right to do so and we have no right to break those laws, as they do not command us to do something immoral.
 
I’d call using someone else work without there permission stealing.
 
For some reason people think everything on the internet ought to be free, but yes stealing is stealing. You can download songs for .79 - .99 a song, is it really that much?
 
40.png
mommy:
You can download songs for .79 - .99 a song, is it really that much?
Click to expand...
Yes, that is too much. Still, sharing works in violation of copyright laws is wrong. It’s not stealing, per se, but it’s still wrong.
 
40.png
baggins321:
Doesn’t it say somewhere in scripture that everything in the heavens and on earth belongs to God, so what right do people have to sell Christian music in the first place then?
Click to expand...
Yeah!

And my neighbor has this real nice car. And the car is on Earth, so it’s obviously God’s car. And surely God wants me to have a nice car…

Hmm. Guess not. Coveting is coveting whether the object of your covetous desire be a car or a license to copy.

Nice try, though. Now go to confession. 😃
 
Would you go into a store and take a Bible off the shelf without paying for it? After all, the Bible is literally God’s product, so you would reason that it’s wrong to make a profit off of Him… Just as it would be wrong to take a Bible off the shelf without paying, it is also wrong to share music by copying CDs or sharing files on the Internet. I actually asked a priest this same question once, and that’s the response I got.
 
Personally, I’d download a song. I’d play it once, and if I like it, look for more songs on that cd. If I like what I hear, I buy the cd. But no matter what, delete the mp3s from the so called “preview.” I guess this could be somewhat compatible to reading a few pages from a book at a local store to see if you will get into it. Though, with the music and movie industries keeping an eye out, I’m not sure if this is such a good idea. Nonetheless, if it’s a band that I all ready like and have heard their songs, then this process is not needed. This is more along the line of you hearing one of thee band’s songs and you being interested in previewing their music before commiting to buying a cd or individual paid legal download from iTunes or Napster.

Not that I do this, just a possible suggestion.
 
My argument is that Christian related music should NOT be copyrighted and should just automatically enter into the public domain. Any secular band that wants to sell their music for profit and greed can go ahead because what they promote is just as bad, which is drug use, sex, calling women ‘hoes’, promoting them to dress like sluts, and in some case even promoting killing people.

How is it against the laws of god and the church to share the word of god in all its forms freely with one another? Don’t you think that’s how Christ would want it? Christian artists have a higher responsibility when it comes to distributing their music, if they are truly Christian I don’t think they should be in it for profit at all.

Rich Men & Money:

Matthew 6:24, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon (riches).”

John 2: 16 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise.

Proverbs 3:13-14, “Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding. For the merchandise of it is better than the merchandise of silver, and the gain thereof than fine gold.”

Proverbs 15:6, “In the house of the righteous is much treasure: but in the revenues of the wicked is trouble.”

Proverbs 15:16, “Better is little with the fear of the LORD than great treasure and trouble therewith.”

Proverbs 15:27, “He that is greedy of gain troubleth his own house; but he that hateth gifts shall live.”

Ecclesiastes 7:12, “For wisdom is a defence, and money is a defence: but the excellency of knowledge is, that wisdom giveth life to them that have it.”

Isaiah 55:1-2, “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness.”

Isaiah 56:11, “Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter.”

1 Timothy 6:5-7,9-10, “Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself. But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”
 
Merchants are Thieves and cause Violence

Matthew 21:12-13, “And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.” (Mark 11:15-17, John 2:14-16).

Revelation 18:3,11,15,23, “…the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more: The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her, shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping and wailing, for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.”

I suppose it’s worth adding - it would be perfectly legal to get any copy of the bible written prior to 1923 and stick it on a file sharing network. It’s only recent laws made in the name of money that changes that.

So these files shouldn’t be shared because it’s against the law. This seems to be the only real argument about why they don’t want people to share. Yet, many bands are more than happy to let their fans share music, so sharing music itself isn’t what’s wrong, it’s doing it against the will of the band itself. Especially if one adopts a strict Christian mode of conduct. It’s legal in Canada and other countries.

As a Christian, I was surprised after discovering several Christian artists were affiliated with the RIAA. I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but this is the same group of people who promote drug use, sex, calling women ‘hoes’, promotes them dressing like sluts, and in some case even promote killing people, and then make a profit from selling all of them. At the same time they want to make money by selling Christian music which promotes just the opposite.

Regardless of what they say, it turns out they are still in it for the money. I believe trying to make a profit for personal gain in the name of God is called ‘Simony’. Just as not everyone who sings about the devil is actually a Satanists, not everyone who sings about Christ is a Christian.

Ok, lets end with a little copyright history. Thomas Jefferson is our founding father who helped build our nation upon the principles of “Natural Law” That is the law of God.

There is no law in nature that says, “If you hear somebody sing a song you can’t repeat it without their permission.” It simply does not exist in nature. For example it is perfectly natural for one to resist being murdered or having their blanket stolen, while there is no corresponding existence of a natural affront to having another sing your song.
 
Thomas Jefferson specifically renounced the notion of intellectual property. It is not property and shares no meaningful similarity with it.

An artist does not have the right to control what others do with his sound recordings after he/she/it publishes it out into the universe. That is the state of nature. The recordings can be replicated without any effort on the part of the artists and there is no other way to stop such replication without turning our world into a police state. It is an affront to the laws of nature.

The copyright clause in art 3 sec 8 of our beloved constitution bares no relationship to the law we have today. CR law as the framers envisioned it lasted 14 years and did not apply to music.

I remember reading in the bible that when there was not enough bread or wine for the multitudes, Jesus multiplied the amount of bread and wine to feed them on a number of occasions. Don’t you think this may of upset the merchants? But it was for the greater good.
The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, Chapter 14

19 And commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.

20 And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full.

But if you would honestly never spend the money for the product, I would not call it “theft” to make a copy from a CD owned by a friend or library. It is unlawful, but I doubt it is immoral because you are not depriving the owner of anything. The owner would never make a dime off of you. I compare it to borrowing a book from a friend.

Finally, if you actually paid for a CD, I see no moral reason why you should not copy if for your own use on the same or other media. To the extent that the copyright law might forbid such copying, the law is unreasonable and contradicts the natural law right of a person to use the goods he purchases as he sees fit.

The violation of a copyright is not exactly the same as shoplifting. Copyrights are artificial legal protections that give monopolies to authors for fixed time periods. You have little effective ability to bargain with the holder of the copyright. To the extent that the law inhibits otherwise honorable private behavior, such as friends sharing with each other, then I say the law is unnatural.

No author reasonably expects that readers will not share their books with friends. Until the CD burner came along, no recording artist expected that friends would not share records or CDs with friends. If the copying is not an alternative to a real sale, then there is no harm.

Similar issues were raised when the record player was invented. Why buy sheet music, covered by copyright, when one could listen to a recording over and over? The same issue was raised over radio. Why buy records, now copyrighted, when one could hear it freely on radio.? The same issue was raised over Video Tape. Sony was sued because one could copy a movie. Memorex was sued also. How many of you copied an album onto a tape?
 
Actually, it is not illegal to make a copy of a tape cassette or a music CD and give it to a friend, or vice versa. It would be illegal to sell your friend such a copy, but it is perfectly legal to give it to him freely, or for him to give you such a copy freely. The same goes for VHS tapes of TV programs and ones you purchase in a store. It is not the case for rented tapes, if I remember correctly – illegal to copy them for personal use or to give a friend a copy. The same restriction probably applies to media borrowed from a public library.

These same perfectly legal activities are understood to be illegal if done on a large scale, thought I’m not sure how the courts actually define that.

Now, publicly “sharing” the same CDs, movies, etc. via the Internet has indeed been found to be illegal – though such decisions are well known to be muddy given the courts previous rulings regarding sharing physical copies with friends.

Also, the DMCA – Digital Millenium Copyright Act – has complicated the issue. It makes it illegal to deliberately break or circumvent a digital copyright protection system, present say on a DVD. In fact, that’s why it is illegal to “burn” copies of DVDs you buy at the store to share with friends. Believe it or not, it’s not the sharing of the physical copy that’s illegal, it’s the breaking of the encryption on the disc, necessary before “ripping and burning” it, that is expressly illegal.
 
40.png
baggins321:
…It is unlawful, but I doubt it is immoral … It is immoral by the nature of being illegal.
Click to expand...
It really doesn’t make a difference what you, Thomas Jefferson, or, for that matter, I think. Copyright protection is one of the enumerated powers granted to the Congress by the Constitution.

Much like the historical doctrine of “Divine right”, the Catholic Church still teaches that governments rule by the power granted to them by God. The Church teaches us that those people in authority are to be regarded as representatives of God.

Therefore, it is only morally acceptable to disobey a law if it contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel.

Filesharing is not necessary for the moral order. Filesharing is not a fundamental right. Filesharing is not demanded by the teachings of the Gospel. Therefore you must regard the civil authorities who passed this law as representatives of God. Therefore, disobedience to this law is disobedience to God.

Disobedience to God is, by definition, immoral.
 
All Christian music should be free? Christian writers and singers like to eat and provide for their families. “The laborer deserves his wage.” The parish priest is doing God’s work. Should he not be paid at all? It’s common sense. The guy’s got to eat and have a place to live. Same for Christian singers. If you like the music enough to want to have a copy of it, buy it. If it’s not worth buying, then it’s not worth listening to. Sharing a few songs with friends is fine. It is like sharing a book or something. The moral line is a gray one in this case. It makes a difference how much you are doing it, and what your intent is. But it’s common sense for most people. Downoading every song you want to hear and never paying for music is clearly wrong. Getting the majority of your music from burned copies is clearly wrong.

Plus, whatever is illegal is also immoral, at least as far as this topic goes. It is immoral to disobey legitimate authority. Even speeding is immoral since it is breaking the law. Sounds like some posters in this thread might be going to great lengths to rationalize something they want to continue doing.

Pax et bonum
 
40.png
baggins321:
My argument is that Christian related music should NOT be copyrighted and should just automatically enter into the public domain.
Click to expand...
**Maybe your just young and have no Idea what the value of a dollar or hard work is? Becasue anyone that has everworked for anything would not be making this argument. **

Do you have any Idea how much effort, time, and money go into making this music?

**“should just automatically enter into the public domain”…Are you serious? **

**These people, who make their LIVING creating and distributing this music for us christians to enjoy, have bills to pay and mouths to feed, just like anyone else. **

Maybe money “should just automatically” enter my bank account, to pay my bills and provide for my son.
40.png
baggins321:
Rich Men & Money:

Matthew 6:24, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon (riches).”
Click to expand...
**Ahhh, and now here you are slingin’ Scripture around to make your point, and your taking it out of context. **
Does everyone who makes money to live serve mammon? I think not!
First, who are you to say what the motive of Christian bands or their members are. Stop Judging.

**Second, why not just pay the 10-15bucks(or whatever, the price is irrelavent), and acquire the music honestly? Why is it such a big deal, are you CONSUMED with trying to save mammon?:rolleyes: **

**I mean not to be so harsh, but you need to realize this little bit of wisdom, “When you are pointing your finger at someone, there are three more pointing right back at you!”, ****or we can just phrase it in the words of Jesus Himself, **
"He who is without sin among you, let him be the [Deut 17:7] first to throw a stone at her."[John 8:7]

Peace of the Lord be with you!
NotSoBigDan
 
Often I am tempted to steal. I know it is a sin, yet I am tempted. My mind tries to rationalize as the devil works on decieving me. Stealing is stealing and a sin.
 
A lot of Christian music is public domain, but that doesn’t mean specific performances of it is.

If it’s copyrighted material, it’s theft.

VIII. Thou shalt not steal
 
Even here at the Catholic Answers site it is possible to download past programs of Catholic Answers Live. However I am at the understanding that to download these programs and share them with people who either DO NOT get Catholic Answers in their area OR would like to listen again in their cars a previous program is ok.

HOWEVER in all cases It would NOT be proper to sell the copies that are made after downloading!.

Here in Cleveland, we do not have Catholic radio. I often tell people at my church about the program and made copies of some of the programs that seemed to be of interest for them. I have done the same with a Catholic Men’s group I am a member of, however NOTHING was sold.

God IS with Us!
Edwin
 
I follow God’s laws, I don’t see anything immoral with breaking the “American” law. If it was, it would be a sin to not have an abortion, or to be pro-life. Martin Luther King would’ve been sinning in breaking the law, when he rallied all those protests and such. Contraception is legal, but it is also a sin. So why do I have to follow American laws?
 
Adam Costanzo:
I follow God’s laws, I don’t see anything immoral with breaking the “American” law. … So why do I have to follow American laws?
Because the government’s authority to rules is given to it by God. They are ruling with God’s authority. To disobey the government is to disobey God (except in the three cases I stated in a previous post). This is not my thought, this is the teaching of the Catholic church.

To address your examples…
Adam Costanzo:
Martin Luther King would’ve been sinning in breaking the law, when he rallied all those protests and such.
This is a good example. As I pointed out in my post above, there are three conditions under which it is morally appropriate (indeed, it may even be our moral duty) to break the civil law. The conditions are:
  • when a law is contrary to the demands of the moral order, or
  • when a law is contrary to the fundamental rights of persons, or
  • when a law is contrary the teachings of the Gospel.
In MLK’s case, I would say the laws he was protesting met all three conditions.
Adam Costanzo:
…
Click to expand...
it would be a sin to not have an abortion, or to be pro-life. … Contraception is legal, but it is also a sin.
These are invalid examples because (unlike China) there’s no law in the US that says “citizens must abort” or “citizens must contracept.” If there was, such laws would be contrary to the teachings of the Gospel and it would be a good Catholic’s moral obligation to disobey those laws. But because these laws don’t exist here, these examples really have no bearing on the discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top