Pirated? Music

[user1234]

I wil just pay for Spotify premium for a month. That will be way cheaper than buying hundreds of songs from iTunes.

 

[WT1]

I don’t believe this is quite fair. As Catholics we believe there are degrees of sin… Degrees of disorder. Some acts are more disordered than others. I agree that pirating music, whether from Library CDs or online, is wrong and sinful… But it is NOT as grave nor the moral equivalent of stealing a physical product from a store:

1. The law distinguishes between these acts- shop lifting is a very different legal animal from copyright infringement
2. In the case of shoplifting, you are depriving a business of physical property that they cannot replace. They invested capital into creating that physical object. That cannot be recovered. In the case of piracy, you simply make a copy for yourself- the copyright owner doesn’t lose a copy… It’s a more abstract loss: the loss of potential profits.
   Both scenarios are wrong but they are NOT moral equivalences. We are not fundamentalist protestants. We believe in gradation.

If you steal then you are breaking one of the 10 commandments and the only way it is not a grave matter is if you do not fully understand the nature of what you are doing. Many in this thread have pointed out why piracy of intellectual property is in fact stealing so therefore anyone reading this thread now has the correct knowledge.

The only real question now is if you are guilty of piracy how are you going to rectify that situation and put yourself back into a state of grace. I assure you trying to justify the crime or “simplifying” it in one’s mind does not restore the state of grace.

For that matter the “gradation” theory is a deception, if you steal a person’s potential wrongfully if that be profit or reputation then you have sinned.

My advice if you are complicit in these activities then find a way to remove them from your life and seek absolution through the rite of reconcilation.

 

[WT1]

1. Artists do not get anything from radio airplay.

FYI. Songwriters do get paid for radio play. That is the business model in place and everyone in the industry understands the procedures and process in place.

 

[Jon_S_1]

I did not say anything about recording the performance. My example was telling a joke that someone else wrote. Should a person not be allowed to tell someone else’s joke?

People read books, newspapers, magazines, check out CDs and DVDs from libraries all the time, consume them without paying a cent for it and then return it to the library. Is that fair to the people who produced these products? Is it moral that they aren’t being paid on an individual basis?

Your analogy is erroneous. That is why I adjusted it. Re telling a joke is like resinging or replaying a song with your own skill.

Recording a song is like recording on a device what you heard at a comedy club.

Huge difference.

As to the “who cares what I do in the privacy of my own home?” God does.

 

[WT1]

So if you took out a book and hand wrote a copy for your own house? Morally bad?

Actually it would be because it would break copyright law and to knowingly do so would be immoral. Just for the record I asked my wife (who is a librarian) and that was her professional opinion as well.

As long as secular laws are moral then we as Christians are obligated to follow them. Now if you were to check out a self help book from the library such as how to start a business then it would be acceptable to take personal notes. However you could not take those notes and write an article (does not matter if you are paid or not for the article) using direct quotes without citing the original author. You also could not republish large parts of the other author’s work without permission.

Think about this way. In China there is virtually no copyright protection and literally billions of dollars are stolen each year in revenue and taxes for pirated material. It is not uncommon for just about any popular item being “cloned” in China and knockoffs reproduced.

To that end it is also immoral to purchase such knockoff items if we know they are illegal copies which would include purses, watches and just about any other popular item.

If you buy a fake Coach purse that has the actual copyright logo on it then that is immoral.

 

[LethalMouse]

Actually it would be because it would break copyright law and to knowingly do so would be immoral. Just for the record I asked my wife (who is a librarian) and that was her professional opinion as well.

As long as secular laws are moral then we as Christians are obligated to follow them. Now if you were to check out a self help book from the library such as how to start a business then it would be acceptable to take personal notes. However you could not take those notes and write an article (does not matter if you are paid or not for the article) using direct quotes without citing the original author. You also could not republish large parts of the other author’s work without permission.

Think about this way. In China there is virtually no copyright protection and literally billions of dollars are stolen each year in revenue and taxes for pirated material. It is not uncommon for just about any popular item being “cloned” in China and knockoffs reproduced.

To that end it is also immoral to purchase such knockoff items if we know they are illegal copies which would include purses, watches and just about any other popular item.

If you buy a fake Coach purse that has the actual copyright logo on it then that is immoral.

All of your examples include pushing the item onto another. This is a matter of purely self notes. Ie: your self help book noted to a large extent for your personal use, no article but only used for reference. At what point do these notes become too inclusive? Again as far as I know there is no copywrite law that says if you write out harry potter on loose leaf paper and staple it together and reread it to yourself then huh? How about notes? Can you write 10 notes? If so does 11 notes become too much? How about a 30 page summary of the story for yourself? I wrote on this forum a goofy version of the star wars movies in a different form (bishops instead of jedi and dofferent but similar names etc) probably one big paragraph… if I wrote it with the literal jedis, never posted it but kept it at my house? Is this sinful? It is a paragraph of 7 novels… how about 2 paragraphs sitting on my personalndesk? 3? Where is your line for notes? And again fully personal not publishing for free or money.

Like for legal purposes this is or was the law: illegal to host (provide movies) but legal to stream them to view. So you are legal therefore non sin? Though you are indirectly involved in the host’s sin. But since this sin is of man law, is it a sin if the law allows the loophole? Where does it end? Where does it begin?

I think many of these matters in regards to sin are conscience issues and weakness/strengths issues. Do you have a penchant for going too far? Do you feel a tug of the divine saying it is wrong? Etc… when the only sin is manmade law and the failable law contradicts itself, where do you know where to go?

 

[LethalMouse]

Ignorance saves from mortal sin, but ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the man made law that disobeying is sinful. So where do we place this? With hundreds of thousands of pages, with fed, state, county, city, with regulatory authorities etc? How can you plead ignorance to be innocent of sin if the law says that is no good? Where does an affirmative requirement begin and end? You watch 1hour of tv a night? Why not study ambiguous laws? When you drive from one town to the next and one place legal is illegal? Why have you not mastered these if you have been alive long enough? And if you watch 4 hrs of tv and soend 1 hr studying law and are not perfect… why not study the laws for 4 hrs a night?

Thenever moving line, you can say it is ridiculous, but who is judge and jury of when the line of ridiculousness ends for non-sin sins?

 

[WT1]

All of your examples include pushing the item onto another. This is a matter of purely self notes. Ie: your self help book noted to a large extent for your personal use, no article but only used for reference. At what point do these notes become too inclusive? Again as far as I know there is no copywrite law that says if you write out harry potter on loose leaf paper and staple it together and reread it to yourself then huh? How about notes? Can you write 10 notes? If so does 11 notes become too much? How about a 30 page summary of the story for yourself? I wrote on this forum a goofy version of the star wars movies in a different form (bishops instead of jedi and dofferent but similar names etc) probably one big paragraph… if I wrote it with the literal jedis, never posted it but kept it at my house? Is this sinful? It is a paragraph of 7 novels… how about 2 paragraphs sitting on my personalndesk? 3? Where is your line for notes? And again fully personal not publishing for free or money.

Like for legal purposes this is or was the law: illegal to host (provide movies) but legal to stream them to view. So you are legal therefore non sin? Though you are indirectly involved in the host’s sin. But since this sin is of man law, is it a sin if the law allows the loophole? Where does it end? Where does it begin?

I think many of these matters in regards to sin are conscience issues and weakness/strengths issues. Do you have a penchant for going too far? Do you feel a tug of the divine saying it is wrong? Etc… when the only sin is manmade law and the failable law contradicts itself, where do you know where to go?

Hand writing an entire book would be a copyright violation and one that a person could be prosecuted for under secular law (although it would be an extremely situation were that to actually happen). As for notes I think it does go to intent, how much you share the information with others and the actual legal restrictions on the subject matter.

Writing your own story based on existing characters is fine as long as you do not profit from it. This is called fan fiction and is fairly popular in some circles. However if you use these characters for promotional purposes without permission then you have violated the copyright. For example if you advertise a service and used your “fan fiction” to draw traffic that would be a violation. What you described doing is not a violation of copyright law.

If you are legally streaming movies via a service that you pay for such as Netflix then that is perfectly fine. If you are illegally streaming copyrighted material for free, for your own benefit, then that would be theft and a sin for both you and the source that it originated from.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Here is an idea for the OP and those who think it’s no big deal.

Why don’t you ask the library if it’s ok for you to copy the music.

Then go to the studio that produces it. Let them know your information and your intention.

If you are unwilling to do that, why?

Probably the same reason you came here to ask. You know it’s wrong but are hoping for some sort of justification.

 

[WT1]

Ignorance saves from mortal sin, but ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the man made law that disobeying is sinful. So where do we place this? With hundreds of thousands of pages, with fed, state, county, city, with regulatory authorities etc? How can you plead ignorance to be innocent of sin if the law says that is no good? Where does an affirmative requirement begin and end? You watch 1hour of tv a night? Why not study ambiguous laws? When you drive from one town to the next and one place legal is illegal? Why have you not mastered these if you have been alive long enough? And if you watch 4 hrs of tv and soend 1 hr studying law and are not perfect… why not study the laws for 4 hrs a night?

Thenever moving line, you can say it is ridiculous, but who is judge and jury of when the line of ridiculousness ends for non-sin sins?

Honestly this reads like an argument that there is a “loophole” to justify behavior that isn’t correct as long as we don’t go to the trouble of finding out if it really is bad behavior.

The fact is WE ALL know that stealing intellectual property is wrong no matter what the form. Not knowing copyright laws has really nothing to do with it because any reasonable person knows this song, movie or book is supposed to be purchased or borrowed under acceptable norms.

To just simply take what you want because it is easily available is no different than shoplifting goods from a store. It really doesn’t matter if it is a felony or a misdemeanor as we have stolen what is not ours.

Is it less of a mortal sin if we steal a pair of $20 jeans than if we steal a $5,000 necklace? Is it less of a mortal sin if we steal for conglomerate retailer than if we steal from an individual?

You can’t legalize sin but you are responsible for recognizing what is sin, being accountable for it and making amends.

 

[LethalMouse]

Hand writing an entire book would be a copyright violation and one that a person could be prosecuted for under secular law (although it would be an extremely situation were that to actually happen). As for notes I think it does go to intent, how much you share the information with others and the actual legal restrictions on the subject matter.

Writing your own story based on existing characters is fine as long as you do not profit from it. This is called fan fiction and is fairly popular in some circles. However if you use these characters for promotional purposes without permission then you have violated the copyright. For example if you advertise a service and used your “fan fiction” to draw traffic that would be a violation. What you described doing is not a violation of copyright law.

If you are legally streaming movies via a service that you pay for such as Netflix then that is perfectly fine. If you are illegally streaming copyrighted material for free, for your own benefit, then that would be theft and a sin for both you and the source that it originated from.

Again you went into promotional purposes and sharing of notes which carries zero debate. We are talking at home personal no sharing whatsoever…

Your last paragraph the issue is a matter of civil law, which says it is not illegal to view.

 

[LethalMouse]

Honestly this reads like an argument that there is a “loophole” to justify behavior that isn’t correct as long as we don’t go to the trouble of finding out if it really is bad behavior.

The fact is WE ALL know that stealing intellectual property is wrong no matter what the form. Not knowing copyright laws has really nothing to do with it because any reasonable person knows this song, movie or book is supposed to be purchased or borrowed under acceptable norms.

To just simply take what you want because it is easily available is no different than shoplifting goods from a store. It really doesn’t matter if it is a felony or a misdemeanor as we have stolen what is not ours.

Is it less of a mortal sin if we steal a pair of $20 jeans than if we steal a $5,000 necklace? Is it less of a mortal sin if we steal for conglomerate retailer than if we steal from an individual?

You can’t legalize sin but you are responsible for recognizing what is sin, being accountable for it and making amends.

You say $20 jeans vs $5,000 necklace but these are not equivalent since they both “take away” from someone.

The equivalent here would be where there is a civil law that states you cannot take from garbage. You see a pair of discarded jeans that not only don’t “take away” from the old owner but actually saves the garbage system soace/money… so now you would have to identify this as sinful. Maybe it is? But what about if there were numerous legal technicalities? Like if it is past the curb you can take it but not past the curb you can’t. So it is half and half? What do you do? Are you a super sinner of hitler magnitude or still on the highway to heaven?

 

[WT1]

You say $20 jeans vs $5,000 necklace but these are not equivalent since they both “take away” from someone.

The equivalent here would be where there is a civil law that states you cannot take from garbage. You see a pair of discarded jeans that not only don’t “take away” from the old owner but actually saves the garbage system soace/money… so now you would have to identify this as sinful. Maybe it is? But what about if there were numerous legal technicalities? Like if it is past the curb you can take it but not past the curb you can’t. So it is half and half? What do you do? Are you a super sinner of hitler magnitude or still on the highway to heaven?

Here is the deal: If you want to participate in an activity and want to find ways to justify that activity, even if it is sinful, then you are going to do it. It’s not my place to judge as God has reserved that domain for himself.

Make no mistake owning, viewing and distributing PIRATED content be it music, movies, books, software or other forms of media is sinful and theft. It is that simple and attempting to justify the activity does not make it not sinful.

If you have read the posts on this thread the one thing you can not claim is ignorance as you have been informed. What you choose to do with that information is of your own free will.

 

[LethalMouse]

Here is the deal: If you want to participate in an activity and want to find ways to justify that activity even if it is sinful then you are going to do it. It’s not my place to judge as God has reserved that domain for himself.

Make no mistake owning, viewing and distributing PIRATED content be it music, movies, books, software or other forms of media is sinful and theft. It is that simple and attempting to justify the activity does not make it not sinful.

If you have read the posts on this thread the one thing you can not claim is ignorance but you have been informed. What you choose to do with that information is of your own free will.

Well, I think you are over personalizing this rather than note the fact that is it a discussion forum for you know discussion of things and their varies aspects. I do not have to engage in any sort of activity to put forth a discussion on the topic, nor is justification a required motivation. But I also see an amazing ability to accuse rather than address a single point

All in all, I give you a :hug3:

 

[WT1]

Well, I think you are over personalizing this rather than note the fact that is it a discussion forum for you know discussion of things and their varies aspects. I do not have to engage in any sort of activity to put forth a discussion on the topic, nor is justification a required motivation. But I also see an amazing ability to accuse rather than address a single point

All in all, I give you a :hug3:

Debate that argues in favor of promoting a sinful behavior is not a benign behavior. Just food for thought.

**ADMONISHING THE SINNER
Do not judge, but be supportive in helping others find their way and correct their mistakes. Together we can learn to walk more closely with Christ.confession

In humility we must strive to create a culture that does not accept sin, while realizing that we all fall at times

Don’t judge, but guide others towards the path of salvation (see Mt 7:1-2)

When you correct someone, don’t be arrogant. We are all in need of God’s loving correction.

We should journey together to a deeper understanding of our shared faith

“Remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye” (Mt 7:5)**

If I have failed in the above then I apologize, but do not want to condone the sin of piracy or confuse those that maybe practicing it.

 

[Tim_D]

Your analogy is erroneous. That is why I adjusted it. Re telling a joke is like resinging or replaying a song with your own skill.

No, you changed the circumstances to support your personal point of view.

Why isn’t telling someone else’s joke “stealing?”

As to the “who cares what I do in the privacy of my own home?” God does.

 

[Jon_S_1]

No, you changed the circumstances to support your personal point of view.

Why isn’t telling someone else’s joke “stealing?”

For the same reason that playing a cover of a song is not stealing.

It’s your own creative rendition.

This example of yours has nothing to do with duplicating a cd so you have an identical copy of a professionally produced item that is distributed for sale.

Re telling a joke is like listening to the cd, and going out and singing the song to someone.

Copying a cd is like videoing the comedy performance. There is a reason tge comedy clubs don’t allow that.

 

[Tim_D]

Not sure why you think a person has to be out for financial gain in order to violate copyright laws?

Have you never heard how Charles Dickens and Mark Twain furiously fought for copyright protections because American newspapers would serialize their books without paying them for it? That was the classic case of the need of copyright protection because an uninvolved third party was experiencing monetary gain based on work that they did not own nor did they create.

In the early days of home video, the FBI warning pertaining to copyright protections specifically noted copying “for monetary gain.” Now, the lobbyists for ASCAP, BMI and other similar organizations have managed to have things amended to include the statement to say “even for non-monetary gain.”

The classic definition of “piracy” involved copying works in order to sell them for financial gain. You saw this a lot in the late 1800’s in the sheet music industry. Some publishers would publish sheet music of songs that they did not own nor had authority to publish simply to cash in on its popularity. I will be the first to agree that such an action is not only unethical but also immoral. In today’s world, however, I don’t see it as a big deal if someone makes a copy of The Best of Sonny & Cher that they borrowed from the local library. If they made 500 copies of it and sold it out of their trunk then yes, I will agree that such an action is wrong. But for listening to in your own home? Nope.

 

[Tim_D]

For the same reason that playing a cover of a song is not stealing.

It’s your own creative rendition.

This example of yours has nothing to do with duplicating a cd so you have an identical copy of a professionally produced item that is distributed for sale.

Re telling a joke is like listening to the cd, and going out and singing the song to someone.

Copying a cd is like videoing the comedy performance. There is a reason tge comedy clubs don’t allow that.

Your conclusions are inconsistent and speak more of your personal opinion than of any objective reality. If something is copyrighted, then the material in it, be it a song or a joke, is not subject to your personal interpretation of its use.

BTW, places with live music can be fined for letting bands play cover songs without a performance license. So in this case, you can be considered to be “stealing” even if it is your own “creative rendition.”

 

[SilverShadow22]

BTW, places with live music can be fined for letting bands play cover songs without a performance license. So in this case, you can be considered to be “stealing” even if it is your own “creative rendition.”

… And there’s the exact moment when copyright laws get out of hand.