Music issues...

[Akimos]

Hello again, everybody.

I have 2 issues in regards to music, but as they were a more “grey” area I decided to post them in the family life forum.

My first issue is in regards to the downloading of music. For a long time, I have been using Peer to peer programs such as Limewire, and while the “little voice” in the back of my head told me it was wrong, I didn’t listen. The other day, I came to realize that it was infringing copyright and therefore stealing, so I removed that music from my iPod.

However, there are some songs that I found from a free source (Downloaded from Youtube via a Youtube downloader, Peer to peer) that I could not find on iTunes or a similar online shop. Some I have found on obscure special DVD’s released by the artist (which I am considering buying…somehow) but some I cannot find anywhere.

I really like music and especially these songs. Upon consulting a friend, he said that I should take the approximate cost of the song and place the money in the poor box. However, that contradicts the words of my parish priest, who agreed that the sin was violating the copyright.

What am I to do?

My second issue comes from the music genre I listen to. I like heavy/power metal/rock/techno songs, and most of these songs have inappropriate themes/lyrics/ect. However, I have been unsuccessful in finding any catholic bands in the genre. What am I to do when some of my favourite “instrumental” pieces are accompanied by these lyrics?

 

[purplesunshine]

1. Stealing is stealing. If you can legally purchase the music even more so. If you truly cannot find the music anywhere else paid then, technically it can be overlooked through the “home recording act” which made it legal to make mix tapes for friends…so long as they were not for sale or mass-produced. Technically, peer-to-peer is such recording. Also, music produced before 1978 has different copyright laws. And music, like software, can fall into the abandonedware category. Covers are not protected under copyright laws either…so if you had your uncle singing a song then you don’t have to worry about that. Also not covered are non-professional recordings. (although, the recording itself may have been illegal)

Not only that but many start-up artists will release free demos to interest you in their music. One could have a very audibly pleasing collection with only this free music.

That being said, try and remember that music is people’s livelyhood. They cannot live for free any more than you can.

1. I try to live by the “be careful little ears” poem. But its really your decision. Would you eat a brownie cooked with “a little bit” of poop? I mean it dosn’t really affect the quality and they look and taste the same so what’s the real problem?

 

[chevalier]

I see violating the copyright as a sin, but at the same time, the extent of copyright and the legal ordering of things with regard to it seem to me to be inconsistent with the natural law. This said, the right to be paid for one’s effort or even for use of one’s property (a passive income) are real rights that need to be respected. On the other hand, using the law to force one’s monetary interest on the rest of the populace the way music companies do is wrong. It crosses the line of their rights and basically uses the power of the law to enforce their interests and that’s not the same as rights. Piracy is wrong. The dictate of music companies is wrong as well. People’s right to participate in cultural life should be respected and copyrights shouldn’t face people with extreme inconvenience and/or violate their privacy (the whole thing with one copy, can’t listen when other people could hear and so on). When it gets to the point that breaking your physical CD, for instance, would terminate your licence and you would have to buy a new CD for the licence, with no legal option to make a backup copy (the way some music or software companies would like it to be), it basically shows greed and a horrible abuse of the legal system. Or copyright protection that prevents legitimate users from making the backup copy they are entitled to–just why isn’t anyone prosecuted for the violation of this right same as one would be for copying illegally? This whole thing is one-sided.

By the way, the real law often does actually offer more rights to users than the copyright holders might try to claim, such as e.g. the backup copies or the right to share with family or even friends–the exact extent of such rights of consumers depends on the particular jurisdiction.

Anyway, yes, to me, the moral solution seems not to download or copy unless perhaps the item can’t be bought legally any more. One could argue that the copyright holder should be able to forbid you the access to his protected stuff even when he isn’t giving you an opportunity to buy it, but I believe that at some point this crosses the line of legitimate rights, and if the copyright holder can’t be found anywhere, then too, it would be kinda hard to presume that he would forbid and on that ground ban people from that music. Anyway, as far as current stuff goes, there’s buying in shop, there’s buying on sale, there’s buying on-line, there’s buying single scores instead of whole CD’s, there’s borrowing from friends, there’s looking for bargains. Don’t need to have a large collection. Can save money on other things if music is so important. Etc. Might be useful to learn what inalienable (i.e. unable to be restricted via a license agreement imprinted on the box or included with it) rights one does have in the light of the law with regard to sharing with family or friends and make use of those rights.

I can’t solve the moral problem of what when you can’t find a CD anywhere but your friend has it and you want a copy–a priest would be better prepared to handle it. I could only suggest looking for used stuff on auctions like E-bay first.

As far as music with bad lyrics goes, I can’t solve that problem either. It would be a good idea to talk to a priest, especially one prepared to give spiritual direction. What matters is basically how it affects your faith and that’s a subjective thing. An objective thing might e.g. be giving money for that music when you’re buying a new CD, which could support more of such lyrics coming (e.g. suicide or anticlerical themes or vulgarity), which are good reasons not to give them money (which obviously doesn’t make it right to download in that case).

 

[Joe_5859]

First of all, as a fellow Catholic power metal afficianado, you must listen to Theocracy (followed closely then by Divinefire, Saviour Machine, Veni Domine, and Narnia – in that order ). Theocracy is phenomenal. They are the complete package: well-orchestrated music, good vocals, great Christian lyrics that are surprisingly non-cheesy, and plenty of power. Every Christmas they put out a Christmas song on their website for free. Wikipedia still has all the links to these songs, which you can legally/morally download from the official Theocracy website.

Second, I recommend reading this article by Jimmy Akin: Bad Music. What makes music sinful to listen to is how it affects you. So you need to discern this for yourself. I’m not sure why many seem to hold the bar higher for musicians in terms of their personal holiness. We don’t sit around contemplating the personal lives of the CEO’s (or even the grunt workers) of Pepsico before buying a Pepsi and giving them money. Is it sinful to buy “Lord of the Rings” on DVD because Peter Jackson is cohabitating and Ian McKellan is gay? No. If it was sinful to patronize anyone that held to erroneous views or lived sinful lives, we couldn’t buy anything or go anywhere.

Purplesunshine asked the question “Would you eat a brownie cooked with ‘a little bit’ of poop?” On the other side of one might ask, would you throw away a 50 carat diamond with a “little bit” of poop on it? (AKA, do you throw out the baby with the bathwater?) Personally, listening to songs that are critical of Christianity only bolsters my faith because I realize how weak their arguments are. If it led me to doubt my faith, that would be a serious problem. Most of the time, such criticisms are really about perceived hypocrisies they see among Christians, which can be a fair criticism. Of course, when stuff is openly blasphemous (rather than simply honest, well-meaning [though often incorrect] criticism) it gives me no enjoyment to listen to, so I don’t really listen to those types of bands.

In regards to your first question, I’m still not convinced, from a moral theology standpoint, that downloading music illegally is technically considered “stealing.” I believe it is sinful for other reasons (such as failure to obey the just laws of a legitimate authority), but I don’t know that it’s technically stealing. I’m open to being wrong on that point, though.

I know some artists do not have a problem with you downloading hard to find bonus tracks, provided you already bought the album. But, in many cases, those sorts of allowances are not up to the artist but are up to the record company.

Regarding those “hard-to-find” tracks, I sympathize with you. There are some of those Japanese bonus tracks that I would love to have but I cannot seem to find them for purchase anywhere (they are not on Amazon or iTunes, nor are the albums [Japanese edition or otherwise] even in print anymore). Of course, I can’t seem to find those tracks anywhere else either and I’d never trust one of those pirating sites not to give me a virus anyway.

To me, this is where copywrite laws get a little silly. What is better for the artist: that a certain song they have recorded fades into oblivion and is never heard by anyone again or that it is spread around? I would think most artists would rather have their legacy live on. Of course, record companies would probably disagree as having those rare tracks widely available limits their ability to capitalize on those songs in the future. But then what happens when a record company goes under? Who does the copywrite fall to? Complex legal questions I don’t know the answer to.

 

[Ryzeke]

I’d heard from somewhere (can’t remember, sorry!) that peer to peer programs were only like ‘half’ illegal. That it wasn’t illegal to download it, but it was to ‘share’ it back into the P2P programs like Limewire. Most of these programs are set up so that you automatically start ‘sharing’ back into the web, and thus, you are violating the law.

BUT, I haven’t actually researched on this for awhile. I should probably go do that now.

 

[FatherRobMcCabe]

No, downloading music on P2P sites is fine. The RIAA is a community of sinners and price setters. You would be better giving your hard earned money to charity and downloading with P2P.

 

[Joe_5859]

No, downloading music on P2P sites is fine. The RIAA is a community of sinners and price setters. You would be better giving your hard earned money to charity and downloading with P2P.

I notice this is your first post. Welcome to CAF!

I’m not sure if you are actually a Catholic priest or if that’s just your user name, but I would respectfully state that, according to the long-standing Catholic moral teaching (as elaborated quite well in Veritatis Splendor) the ends never justifies the means.

One might also argue that we would be better off giving our hard earned money to charity rather than paying taxes / buying stuff at Walmart / eating at McDonald’s / etc. But that doesn’t justify stealing from those entities.

 

[Akimos]

Regarding those “hard-to-find” tracks, I sympathize with you. There are some of those Japanese bonus tracks that I would love to have but I cannot seem to find them for purchase anywhere (they are not on Amazon or iTunes, nor are the albums [Japanese edition or otherwise] even in print anymore). Of course, I can’t seem to find those tracks anywhere else either and I’d never trust one of those pirating sites not to give me a virus anyway.

To me, this is where copywrite laws get a little silly. What is better for the artist: that a certain song they have recorded fades into oblivion and is never heard by anyone again or that it is spread around? I would think most artists would rather have their legacy live on. Of course, record companies would probably disagree as having those rare tracks widely available limits their ability to capitalize on those songs in the future. But then what happens when a record company goes under? Who does the copywrite fall to? Complex legal questions I don’t know the answer to.

Ah, yes. I can’t find EPM by Dragonforce anywhere and it’s bugging me.

I really don’t have a problem with viruses (anymore) because I found a youtube downloader, as stated in the OP.

 

[Joe_5859]

Ah, yes. I can’t find EPM by Dragonforce anywhere and it’s bugging me.

I really don’t have a problem with viruses (anymore) because I found a youtube downloader, as stated in the OP.

I missed that. They make youtube downloaders?!? You learn something new everyday! I guess that would come in handy…

 

[Akimos]

I see violating the copyright as a sin, but at the same time, the extent of copyright and the legal ordering of things with regard to it seem to me to be inconsistent with the natural law. This said, the right to be paid for one’s effort or even for use of one’s property (a passive income) are real rights that need to be respected. On the other hand, using the law to force one’s monetary interest on the rest of the populace the way music companies do is wrong. It crosses the line of their rights and basically uses the power of the law to enforce their interests and that’s not the same as rights. Piracy is wrong. The dictate of music companies is wrong as well. People’s right to participate in cultural life should be respected and copyrights shouldn’t face people with extreme inconvenience and/or violate their privacy (the whole thing with one copy, can’t listen when other people could hear and so on). When it gets to the point that breaking your physical CD, for instance, would terminate your licence and you would have to buy a new CD for the licence, with no legal option to make a backup copy (the way some music or software companies would like it to be), it basically shows greed and a horrible abuse of the legal system. Or copyright protection that prevents legitimate users from making the backup copy they are entitled to–just why isn’t anyone prosecuted for the violation of this right same as one would be for copying illegally? This whole thing is one-sided.

I know that as Christians we are expected to follow man’s law if it does not contradict God’s law, but I don’t care for the trivial matters. If I have owned a copy of (insert music/game/ect) in the past, and have lost the physical copy, I see nothing wrong with (re)downloading the (music/game ROM) ect.

I can’t solve the moral problem of what when you can’t find a CD anywhere but your friend has it and you want a copy–a priest would be better prepared to handle it. I could only suggest looking for used stuff on auctions like E-bay first.

This is a really big problem. “Metal” isn’t the only genre of music I listen too - I also listen to some obscure songs from other cultures. Some songs come from freeware games (Like the Touhou songs from ZUN, and If I find out that they’re not freeware after this i’m going to scream! Argh!), but most are just horribly obscure.

For the record, my friend didn’t have a copy, I just consolted him for some advice. He doesn’t even my kind of songs.

Another dillemma is Bonus tracks - Dragonforce is especially bad at this. They have 4 albums, and 3 of my favourite songs are Japanese only bonus tracks. (EPM from Ultra Beatdown, Where Dragons Rule from VotD, Cry of the Brave from Sonic Firestorm). Since I don’t live in Japan…

As far as music with bad lyrics goes, I can’t solve that problem either. It would be a good idea to talk to a priest, especially one prepared to give spiritual direction. What matters is basically how it affects your faith and that’s a subjective thing. An objective thing might e.g. be giving money for that music when you’re buying a new CD, which could support more of such lyrics coming (e.g. suicide or anticlerical themes or vulgarity), which are good reasons not to give them money (which obviously doesn’t make it right to download in that case).

I’m probably being a bit of a stickler with this one to be honest - Whenever I hear something like “Evil” or “Dark” in a song I cringe a little bit.

 

[roratecaeli]

I’m not going to say anything about the piracy question, but I second what many others have already said: Music isn’t evil in itself. However, I wonder whether it is possible to make a useful distinction between “evil music” and “good music by people with shifty opinions” in some cases. (I won’t mention any specifics, but some so-called “art” should simply be avoided, period.)

With that said, I also think you should do yourself a favour and thoroughly check what a band stands for. If there is something that rubs you the wrong way, either avoid that particular song/album or steer clear of that band altogether, depending on how you feel and what your conscience tells you. (For example, some Catholics like Saviour Machine and simply ignore the theological errors in their lyrics, but I would personally rather listen to a vaguely Gnostic band than a blatantly anti-Catholic and Dispensationalist Christian one.)

Good luck in your search for good music! God bless!

 

[kib]

AkIimos, I don’t have anything to add about the P2P downloading.

Concerning the lyrics, about 2 years ago I purged my music collection of artists with “bad” lyrics. Until that time I had been listening to bands like Agnostic Front, Killing the Dream, Bars, and many others that either explicitly said hateful things about God or had immoral lyrics. There was a time when I thought I could just listen to this music and the lyrics would have no effect on me. I changed my mind. In my opinion, listening to hate filled or negative lyrics has a negative impact on the health of your soul. It was difficult to get rid of so much awesome music, but I had to do it.