Is file sharing a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aragorn1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
…
It is stealing - when you download something that is not your’s and you have not paid for this, then you are stealing someones talent - which they should get paid for. …
I wonder if you might consider the hypothetical situation in which the market for a product does not exist. For instance, the film/song in question might be available for (illegal) download and is not present is stores (either physical or web based).

As the product is not being sold, the owner of it isn’t getting compensation either way.
 
There is no other reason for file sharing sites but to steal other people’s work. Period.

I would work to shut down all file sharing sites.

Peace,
Ed
Dear Ed,

Many filesharing sites (like BT-Tree) allow only sharing of, for instance, files of live performances of music by Trade-Tape friendly artists who openly, and publicly, endorse the taping and sharing of their public performances (e.g. WILCO, Phish, The Grateful Dead, The Levon Helm Band, etc…).

Would you close them down as well?

Or what about sites where people can watch streams of broadcast television programming? Programming that is freely given to anyone with a T.V. set in exchange for the opportunity to broadcast commercial advertisements? My own thinking is that it is neither sinful nor immoral to watch such streamed material online. The only counterargument I can think of is that you are depriving the producers of the program of the opportunity to advertise to you. But then so is anyone who uses a (perfectly legal) TiVo or any other openly and publicly and legally sold DVR device.

I buy my music from Itunes, or download from Trade-Tape friendly artists only. I don’t download copyrighted movies. But I do watch streamed Broadcast Television (I don not own a TV), especially programs which I know are or will be offered for free on Hulu, or ABC.com etc.

My own rule is that, if the Holy Spirit convicts me of a sin, I will listen, and I will confess. And just to be on the safe side I plan to mention this issue at confession this week. And I will abide by the counsel of my confessor.

One question I have for everyone. If you think it is a sin, is a mortal sin? Should it keep one from the Blessed Sacrament?

Best
APT
 
the key word is sharing in file sharing… 😃
i like file sharing cause i can see a movie and find out for myself if its good to buy or not and i dont have to pend the my hard earn money in something i might never see again, for example the movie 2012, if it wasnt for file sharing i might of bought this piece of garbage or apocalypto, it was great so i went out and bought it.
if you take something that someone created and then sell copies of it to make a profit yes that would be considered illegal and a sin but if someone puts something out there for free how is that a crime or sin?
👍
By your logic I should be able to enter a movie theater without paying admission, so I chould check out the movie, if I like it I’ll pay admission, if not I won’t pay admission. This is ridiculous. As I have learned in a short time on these forums, there are many people trying to justify sin. People trying to rationalize in their mind that a certain sin is ok. A sin is a sin no matter what we think of it. And file sharing is just a nice name for stealing, which breaks the 7th commandment.
 
If I buy an object e.g. a book, after reading it, I can decide to give it to a family member or friend to also read it (the receiver hasn’t paid for it but is receiving it from someone how as paid for it). That’s sharing or giving. IMO
If you did buy a book & wanted to give it away, fine. But you could only give it to one person. If you wanted to give the book away to 1,000 people legally, you would have to buy 1,000 books. Just because the technology today enables us to make copies of digital media or misuse the internet for so-called file sharing, does not make it right. Our entitlement society has people thinking today, they deserve stuff without any effort or payment on their part.
 
If you did buy a book & wanted to give it away, fine. But you could only give it to one person. If you wanted to give the book away to 1,000 people legally, you would have to buy 1,000 books. Just because the technology today enables us to make copies of digital media or misuse the internet for so-called file sharing, does not make it right. Our entitlement society has people thinking today, they deserve stuff without any effort or payment on their part.
Actually Andy, suppose you owned the book, and a digital scanner. Then you could scan the book into a pdf file and share it with whomever you pleased, say 100 friends, as easy sending an email. Now assume that doing so is sinful. If it is then can’t be just an accidental property of your action that makes it sinful but must be something intrinsic to the act of sharing the material that makes it so. But then you could, if you chose, take the book from friend to friend, loaning it to each of them one at a time until all 100 had gotten their use of it. We would not think it illegal or sinful for you to do so. But then how are the cases dissimilar? It can only be because your friends are keeping a copy in the pdf case. So then, imagine that your friends, to whom you loan the book also have photocopiers. Is it a sin for them to photocopy the book you loaned them? If you say yes, then you must tells us why it is wrong for them to mechanically photocopy the book, but not for them to copy the book with their brain (which is in essence what it is to read a book, i.e., to make a mental copy of the thing read). How is the choice of copying mediums morally salient (brain tissue in the temporal lobes vs. paper)? You are copying my words right now, just by reading this post, and you may repeat what you read to others, and that could be a sin (which seems to absurd, right?).

I don’t know what to say other than to trust in Holy Spirit and guidance and counsel of one’s confessor on the matter.

I do know this. The Gospel would not have spread as far as it did, as fast as it did, with today’s publishing/copyright Laws. Unless of course, the Church was Savy enough to endorse and utilize public filesharing.
 
Actually Andy, suppose you owned the book, and a digital scanner. Then you could scan the book into a pdf file and share it with whomever you pleased, say 100 friends, as easy sending an email. Now assume that doing so is sinful. If it is then can’t be just an accidental property of your action that makes it sinful but must be something intrinsic to the act of sharing the material that makes it so. But then you could, if you chose, take the book from friend to friend, loaning it to each of them one at a time until all 100 had gotten their use of it. We would not think it illegal or sinful for you to do so. But then how are the cases dissimilar? It can only be because your friends are keeping a copy in the pdf case. So then, imagine that your friends, to whom you loan the book also have photocopiers. Is it a sin for them to photocopy the book you loaned them? If you say yes, then you must tells us why it is wrong for them to mechanically photocopy the book, but not for them to copy the book with their brain (which is in essence what it is to read a book, i.e., to make a mental copy of the thing read). How is the choice of copying mediums morally salient (brain tissue in the temporal lobes vs. paper)? You are copying my words right now, just by reading this post, and you may repeat what you read to others, and that could be a sin (which seems to absurd, right?).

I don’t know what to say other than to trust in Holy Spirit and guidance and counsel of one’s confessor on the matter.

I do know this. The Gospel would not have spread as far as it did, as fast as it did, with today’s publishing/copyright Laws. Unless of course, the Church was Savy enough to endorse and utilize public filesharing.
I must admit I don’t know what the substantive difference is, but somehow libraries get away with it, eh?
 
By your logic I should be able to enter a movie theater without paying admission, so I chould check out the movie, if I like it I’ll pay admission, if not I won’t pay admission. This is ridiculous. As I have learned in a short time on these forums, there are many people trying to justify sin. People trying to rationalize in their mind that a certain sin is ok. A sin is a sin no matter what we think of it. And file sharing is just a nice name for stealing, which breaks the 7th commandment.
Saying a sin is a sin is not an accurate statement. I have made this very statement on another thread and I got disproved.

File sharing is not illegal. Please stop generalising things. You might wanna read more about file sharing.
There are just so many people who use file sharing in so many other ways without violating any law.

What is sensitive is only the sharing of copyrighted materials.

To downlaod (legally or illegal) is just part of file sharing because a file (or a copy of a file) will be transferred from one location to another.

So it doesn’t make any sense to equate file sharing to stealing.
 
Actually Andy, suppose you owned the book, and a digital scanner. Then you could scan the book into a pdf file and share it with whomever you pleased, say 100 friends, as easy sending an email. Now assume that doing so is sinful. If it is then can’t be just an accidental property of your action that makes it sinful but must be something intrinsic to the act of sharing the material that makes it so. But then you could, if you chose, take the book from friend to friend, loaning it to each of them one at a time until all 100 had gotten their use of it. We would not think it illegal or sinful for you to do so. But then how are the cases dissimilar? It can only be because your friends are keeping a copy in the pdf case. So then, imagine that your friends, to whom you loan the book also have photocopiers. Is it a sin for them to photocopy the book you loaned them? If you say yes, then you must tells us why it is wrong for them to mechanically photocopy the book, but not for them to copy the book with their brain (which is in essence what it is to read a book, i.e., to make a mental copy of the thing read). How is the choice of copying mediums morally salient (brain tissue in the temporal lobes vs. paper)? You are copying my words right now, just by reading this post, and you may repeat what you read to others, and that could be a sin (which seems to absurd, right?).

I don’t know what to say other than to trust in Holy Spirit and guidance and counsel of one’s confessor on the matter.

I do know this. The Gospel would not have spread as far as it did, as fast as it did, with today’s publishing/copyright Laws. Unless of course, the Church was Savy enough to endorse and utilize public filesharing.
Well said.
If one is allowed to loan an object like a book to friends (let me just without making a copy) then the form of giving/loaning shouldn’t matter because in the end, they all get a mental copy (as you said) of the thing which is the end result anyway.
 
Our entitlement society has people thinking today, they deserve stuff without any effort or payment on their part.
Those who can afford would or should buy (and I believe most of them do buy).

However, there are people who can’t afford. Hence can’t buy and wouldn’t buy.
 
I have downloaded probably close to 100 music albums, movies, games, and computer programs many of which I’m sure are copyrighted.

I believe this is a sin and I am trying to be more careful about it.

I also believe that these should be shared freely for everyone to enjoy and the producers profit should be the appreciation of others.

However it takes alot of money to create these things and the initial profit from the sale of any item covers the cost of production. So by using these copyrighted files for free we are depriving the producers of money, and if everybody were to download for free there would be little or no money in music and movies and nobody would make them any more.
 
By your logic I should be able to enter a movie theater without paying admission, so I chould check out the movie, if I like it I’ll pay admission, if not I won’t pay admission. This is ridiculous. As I have learned in a short time on these forums, there are many people trying to justify sin. People trying to rationalize in their mind that a certain sin is ok. A sin is a sin no matter what we think of it. And file sharing is just a nice name for stealing, which breaks the 7th commandment.
no, a sin is a sin and when is not a sin it is not, i am not trying to make a profit on anything i download and i am not stealing it either because someone else buys the movie and the maker of these movies decides to give a “digital copy” to he or she that bought it, and these people decide they want to put something they bought online to share with other people for free… how is that a sin? LOL 😃
no one is trying to justify sinning here because there is no sin in this, now if you are downloading and selling kiddy porn or porn than YES that would be considered a sin, but downloading a cartoon or a movie that you are not to sure about seeing and the actually buying the damn thing after… sorry sir but that is not a sin and no commandment is broken, maybe we should shut down public libraries for letting people read or borrow stuff for free?.. or maybe you shouldn’t t-vo or tape anything from tv either because it might be a sin?..
sorry but i know my commandments too and file sharing is not stealing on this planet.

oh yeah and i don’t go to the movies unless there is something specific that i wanna watch, so my logic is just fine. :tiphat:
 
If you did buy a book & wanted to give it away, fine. But you could only give it to one person. If you wanted to give the book away to 1,000 people legally, you would have to buy 1,000 books. Just because the technology today enables us to make copies of digital media or misuse the internet for so-called file sharing, does not make it right. Our entitlement society has people thinking today, they deserve stuff without any effort or payment on their part.
That is exactly what is happening. Copyright means right to copy. If someone has no permission to copy my work then they have no right to “share” it through a file sharing site. The company I work for spent many months putting a book together. About 30 days later, one of our employees found the entire book scanned cover to cover on a file sharing site. What if it was your book?

God bless,
Ed
 
Actually Andy, suppose you owned the book, and a digital scanner. Then you could scan the book into a pdf file and share it with whomever you pleased, say 100 friends, as easy sending an email. Now assume that doing so is sinful. If it is then can’t be just an accidental property of your action that makes it sinful but must be something intrinsic to the act of sharing the material that makes it so. But then you could, if you chose, take the book from friend to friend, loaning it to each of them one at a time until all 100 had gotten their use of it. We would not think it illegal or sinful for you to do so. But then how are the cases dissimilar? It can only be because your friends are keeping a copy in the pdf case. So then, imagine that your friends, to whom you loan the book also have photocopiers. Is it a sin for them to photocopy the book you loaned them? If you say yes, then you must tells us why it is wrong for them to mechanically photocopy the book, but not for them to copy the book with their brain (which is in essence what it is to read a book, i.e., to make a mental copy of the thing read). How is the choice of copying mediums morally salient (brain tissue in the temporal lobes vs. paper)? You are copying my words right now, just by reading this post, and you may repeat what you read to others, and that could be a sin (which seems to absurd, right?).

I don’t know what to say other than to trust in Holy Spirit and guidance and counsel of one’s confessor on the matter.

I do know this. The Gospel would not have spread as far as it did, as fast as it did, with today’s publishing/copyright Laws. Unless of course, the Church was Savy enough to endorse and utilize public filesharing.
That is a very sad excuse about the Bible. I can get books on amazon for 2 cents. So, people want to pay nothing, I get that. Please stop with the excuses. It’s wrong. Period.

There is nothing wrong with the copyright laws by the way. Nothing. Too bothered to go to a Library? Not the fault of publishers.

God bless,
Ed
 
Those who can afford would or should buy (and I believe most of them do buy).

However, there are people who can’t afford. Hence can’t buy and wouldn’t buy.
That’s nonsense. People who can’t afford to buy might get a shared from someone they’ll never meet copy off a file sharing site. Who are you trying to kid? I’ve been working in the media for years. Nothing is the price anyone can afford.

God bless,
Ed
 
Saying a sin is a sin is not an accurate statement. I have made this very statement on another thread and I got disproved.

File sharing is not illegal. Please stop generalising things. You might wanna read more about file sharing.
There are just so many people who use file sharing in so many other ways without violating any law.

What is sensitive is only the sharing of copyrighted materials.

To downlaod (legally or illegal) is just part of file sharing because a file (or a copy of a file) will be transferred from one location to another.

So it doesn’t make any sense to equate file sharing to stealing.
Perhaps you can explain that to the file sharing sites I tag that have illegal copies of our books.

God bless,
Ed
 
no, a sin is a sin and when is not a sin it is not, i am not trying to make a profit on anything i download and i am not stealing it either because someone else buys the movie and the maker of these movies decides to give a “digital copy” to he or she that bought it, and these people decide they want to put something they bought online to share with other people for free… how is that a sin? LOL 😃
no one is trying to justify sinning here because there is no sin in this, now if you are downloading and selling kiddy porn or porn than YES that would be considered a sin, but downloading a cartoon or a movie that you are not to sure about seeing and the actually buying the damn thing after… sorry sir but that is not a sin and no commandment is broken, maybe we should shut down public libraries for letting people read or borrow stuff for free?.. or maybe you shouldn’t t-vo or tape anything from tv either because it might be a sin?..
sorry but i know my commandments too and file sharing is not stealing on this planet.

oh yeah and i don’t go to the movies unless there is something specific that i wanna watch, so my logic is just fine. :tiphat:
So now you are comparing your actions to a public library. You are downloading this stuff out of the goodness of your heart. Give me a break. According to Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary, the definition of steal is to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice Are you wrongfully taking someone else’s property? If the company wanted us to have it for free, they would put up their own website for you to download it for free. But maybe the company wants to be compensated for their time, money & effort in producing something.

It is not our right to put anything online that does not belong to us for free. It is not our property. It is cleary stated for personal use only. Also, TIVO along with DVR is for personal use. Anyone who uses TIVO or DVR has paid for cable or satellite tv & is using it for personal use.

I get it, you won’t go to the movies if there is something you want to see because you have to pay for it. But you have no problem downloading stuff & viewing it, even though, the people who produce this stuff are not giving it away for free. They actually want people to pay for it before they view it. Just becuase it is available online, does not make it right.
 
So now you are comparing your actions to a public library. You are downloading this stuff out of the goodness of your heart. Give me a break. According to Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary, the definition of steal is to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice Are you wrongfully taking someone else’s property? If the company wanted us to have it for free, they would put up their own website for you to download it for free. But maybe the company wants to be compensated for their time, money & effort in producing something.

It is not our right to put anything online that does not belong to us for free. It is not our property. It is cleary stated for personal use only. Also, TIVO along with DVR is for personal use. Anyone who uses TIVO or DVR has paid for cable or satellite tv & is using it for personal use.

I get it, you won’t go to the movies if there is something you want to see because you have to pay for it. But you have no problem downloading stuff & viewing it, even though, the people who produce this stuff are not giving it away for free. They actually want people to pay for it before they view it. Just becuase it is available online, does not make it right.
Andy, My brother and I used to go over to our mother’s house all the time, set her DVR to record something for us, then come back in a week, and watch it. We didn’t own the DVR, we didn’t pay a cable bill, or Satellite bills. Did we sin? Or what about when I lived with a roommate and used his cable and a DVR to watch programming I similarly did not pay for, was I sinning, then? Or what about when I was 11 years old living in my mother’s house, watching her HBO, did I sin then?

As for the dictionary definition: If I watch a shared copy of a Television show, from whom have I “taken” property? The producers still own the show, the original copy still exists, I seem to have “taken” nothing at all. Contrast that with the case where I rob a jewelry store and walk out with with a diamond necklace. In that case I really have “taken” property from the store, and they no longer have it.

Intellectual property can be abused. But it cannot be stolen. If I plagiarize someone else’s work, I abuse their intellectual property, but it remains their Intellectual property. I have “taken” nothing from them.
 
Read what the FBI has to say:

fbi.gov/cyberinvest/cyberedletter.htm

God bless,
Ed
I agree with Ed. Also, straight from the link provided by Ed. It is a violation of Federal law to distribute copyrighted music, movies, software, games, and other works without authorization.

Does anyone, besides the company who produces the stuff, have the authorization to put it online? And if not, you are in the wrong for downloading it from a site who does not have authorizaion from the company.
 
Andy, My brother and I used to go over to our mother’s house all the time, set her DVR to record something for us, then come back in a week, and watch it. We didn’t own the DVR, we didn’t pay a cable bill, or Satellite bills. Did we sin? Or what about when I lived with a roommate and used his cable and a DVR to watch programming I similarly did not pay for, was I sinning, then? Or what about when I was 11 years old living in my mother’s house, watching her HBO, did I sin then?

As for the dictionary definition: If I watch a shared copy of a Television show, from whom have I “taken” property? The producers still own the show, the original copy still exists, I seem to have “taken” nothing at all. Contrast that with the case where I rob a jewelry store and walk out with with a diamond necklace. In that case I really have “taken” property from the store, and they no longer have it.

Intellectual property can be abused. But it cannot be stolen. If I plagiarize someone else’s work, I abuse their intellectual property, but it remains their Intellectual property. I have “taken” nothing from them.
It can be stolen, especially, if it is under copyright: **the exclusive legal right to reproduce, publish, sell, or distribute the matter and form of something (as a literary, musical, or artistic work) ** It is on somebody’s hard drive or server. And if you download it illegally, it is now on your hard drive. It is all tangible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top