Possible scruple?

[CathMass]

Okay, lately I have been concerned about going on some websites and files because I am afraid that people on blogs and other websites might be breaking copyright laws by posting certain pictures or texts online without permission of the respective authors.

Example: Websites or blogs that post pictures of Pope Francis and video stills from the televised Masses. Another example would be a website with artwork and text that is copyrighted but no citation of their original source is given.

Part of me assumes that in many cases, these people did get permission or at least are acting on the basis of fair use or that these people may be ignorant of the morality behind using such stuff without permission.

Question. Do I commit a mortal sin by viewing websites, blogs or literature that possibly may contain photos or texts that were posted in violation of copyright or am I just being scrupulous?

 

[MaeganFlinchum1]

Scrupulous

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Relax. Even the copyright lawyers would laugh at your fears.

 

[Sirach2]

Without this symbol © connected to the work, whatever its form, there is no copyright attached to it. You may use it freely. Even in copyrighted books, for instance, we are permitted to copy excerpts from it, such as a page or a few paragraphs.

Youtube videos are generally not copyrighted, so if anyone posts a link to them, they are not in violation. The Vatican has some photos of Pope Francis on its website, but it is impossible to copy them. They have found a way to prevent it, but you may freely link to the website and view them.