Is watching full movies on YouTube stealing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter michael-kaw
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Poor reasoning. The average person could care less if something goes into the Public Domain. No one owns it. That means what to potential profiteers? New stories based off the old work? Written by who? With a cover painted by who? And regarding any new works, can they get a copyright or trademark? Or does the public own it?
 
I assume the same applies to music on youtube? I listen to megamixes sometimes on youtube, didn’t think it was stealing.
 
I too listen to music via YouTube. It’s how I discovered some of my favorite songs and relisten to old favorites.
 
This kind of thing is relatively a new technology and therefore there’s no definitive answer for that until the enforcement of the technology itself becomes clear. We can follow the rule set up by the government as to whether it is illegal to watch it or not.

I would think, since it (YouTube) is for public viewing, viewers are innocent and therefore not culpable of sin.
 
Irishmom2 said:
Why does the public have a right to someone else’s work?
Click to expand...
People have a right not to have their business interfered with except as authorized by law.

So if something is in the public domain, the former copyright holders have no right to stop anyone from making use of it.
 
I give up.

I get all that. No one has yet answered the actual question I asked though.

Never mind. I am not going to ask again.
 
[quote=“Irishmom2, post:47, topic:482983, full:true”]
****I give up. ****

I get all that. No one has yet answered the actual question I asked though.

I’ll take another stab at it. There is a benefit to society when information and art are distributed as widely as possible. New information becomes more readily accessible to the masses. Innovation can accelerate. (It can also slow down because there is less incentive to create new intellectual property.)

With art, society becomes more cultured and there is an increase in learning.

With medicine, it can be reverse engineered. Generic alternatives become immediately available. More people can access health care due to lower expenses.

Instead of one person or company having exclusive rights to their intellectual property, everyone can use it. This is a benefit to society.

In a nutshell, these are a few arguments against intellectual property laws from a person who is by no means an expert on the subject.
 
Last edited:
Information is not the correct word. If I create a story and make a movie, write and perform a song or do previously tangible works, like TV shows, I own it. Art, like TV shows, was not more available to the masses if you missed an episode. When the VCR appeared, you could legally buy collections of old TV shows and movies. You could also loan out recordings and other media from a public library. Information is not helpful to anyone if you don’t know how to find it. I’m a professional researcher, and trust me, sifting through the junk info to find the good info takes time. Innovation still requires work and money. New movies get made every year. No one asks for a new book about this or that. And sometimes, the titles give no clue as to the contents. Example: “The Oranges Are Sweet.”

My company creates new intellectual property all the time. We’ve never desired not to. Today’s society is generally less cultured and generally less interested in learning, or disappointed with what they find if they are. For example: historical non-fiction.
 
Last edited:
Thanks but does everything on YouTube say “standard YouTube license”?
 
I personally think our current copyright laws are a bit ridiculous. The constitution offers copyright protection for a limited time in order to help inventors/creators and others to make a living off their inventions so that they may continue to produce or improve their work. This constitutional protection was made to promote progress, creativity and discovery. The manner in which this is enforced today limits and restricts creativity more than it promotes it. It has worked to monopolize works well beyond a reasonable time, which tends to restrict others from making something better based off of it. The last thing we should want is for progress to remain stagnant. The constitution is very clear on the government protection that is allowed to individuals, which ultimately is meant to help society, not create a monopoly for individuals.
[The Congress shall have power] “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” - Article I Section 8, Clause 8
Click to expand...
 
Yes, it is technically stealing, but the age-old problem with youtube is that folks who generate the original have GOT to know some it’s on there and some of them don’t care----or they are humble enough to get that it’s free advertising because otherwise no one would watch their stuff.

I would also say it’s pretty clear some companies and artists who own the work don’t seem to care a lot if people upload short clips for the reason I just mentioned, but the problem is you can’t read their minds.

Basically, you have to go with that it’s stealing unless you know for a fact that whoever owns the content doesn’t care. For instance, Ben Shapiro lets this “thug life” thing go on with some of his content.
 
michael-kaw said:
I have already made at least one thread where I mentioned this but they got a bit messed up. If I were to watch a film on YouTube that wasn’t legally uploaded would that be sinful. I don’t particularly think so because it’s not me that is doing the distribution. Also if someone was to say that I am supporting it, I don’t think one view out of thousands would make a difference. However the only thing I am struggling with is the fact that the pleasure you are getting from watching the film, the makers aren’t getting any sort of money or credit from it, could I have some clarification? Thank you.
Click to expand...
It is not up to us to research to see if something on youtube is copyrighted. If it does not explicitly say something you are about to watch is copyrighted just go ahead and watch it.
 
HolySpirit said:
I’ll take another stab at it. There is a benefit to society when information and art are distributed as widely as possible. New information becomes more readily accessible to the masses. Innovation can accelerate. (It can also slow down because there is less incentive to create new intellectual property.)
Click to expand...
The person creaging the art still needs to benefit. Imagine if you wrote a book. So I see it, copy it down, and start selling it without your permission. I’ve now stolen your work. I have not contributed to the enlarging of culture. I have merely destroyed your profits and possibly discouraged you from writing again because you know you won’t profit. Copyright exists for a reason.
 
Most of our books are paperbacks but we do produce a handful of hardcovers. 30 days after the release of one hardcover, it was perfectly copied on another site for free download. No way to know how much money we lost but free is the price some people want.

Illegal movie and TV show downloaders on youtube have come up with a few tricks to make it harder for copyright owners to find the illegal copies using automatic search methods.
 
I was answering Irishmom’s question.

She asked for a public policy argument as to why there should not be extremely restrictive IP protection for the creators of IP. No one was answering her question, so I presented a few policy points for unfettered public forum usage.

In no way did my answer reflect my personal opinions one way or the other. I just discussed some things like nearly instant generic medication through reverse engineering.
 
michael-kaw said:
Is watching full movies on YouTube stealing?
Click to expand...
No. One could make the argument that the work was taken without express approval, however you, as a viewer, are free from any culpability associated with the act. Watching these things online is not a crime for you. I am unsure about the uploader, however.

God Bless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top