Question about stealing and salvation

[mcs7474]

I had been downloading music for free for years. Over the years I erase some due to “me not liking it as much”. So about 5 months ago I had around 800 illigelly downloaded songs. What I did was deleted them all, why, becuase it’s a sin (and easy enough to repair). I am currently looking at the songs I had before and deciding if I want to buy them, some are a must buy, some I can do without. To download all that stuff for free is a sin, at least in the United States, not sure what the laws are in other countries, but here its illegal therfore a sin.

 

[faqcorner]

I had been downloading music for free for years. Over the years I erase some due to “me not liking it as much”. So about 5 months ago I had around 800 illigelly downloaded songs. What I did was deleted them all, why, becuase it’s a sin (and easy enough to repair). I am currently looking at the songs I had before and deciding if I want to buy them, some are a must buy, some I can do without. To download all that stuff for free is a sin, at least in the United States, not sure what the laws are in other countries, but here its illegal therfore a sin.

I remember somewhere saying that the laws of the land aren’t that connected with the actual laws (which in this context I’m talking about by actual laws as in Divine laws/Bible/God’s Law/etc)

oh and at the moment, in the US, interestingly something (I think you may have heard of it, but oh well) “abortion”.

it’s well… legal in the US. it’s not illegal. doesn’t mean it’s a sin.
people going crazy with other people (south africa → AIDS epidemic a few years ago w/blah blah blah → learnt in world history…and hated the unit) it’s not illegal, actually it was quite common + the people doing it thought it was correct and morally acceptable. doing something wrong? yes! a sin? YES. a MORTAL SIN (sex uncontrolled…) YES. using a condom (sp?) if I remember correctly YES

that said, I don’t think any of the laws in the US have any impact on sin or not, unless their teachings actually co-exist perfectly with each other (which they unfortunately do not.)

 

[LilyM]

The artical says that the degree of the sin is based on the value and the relation of the Value to the person it is taken form.

Taking $20 form a rich guy is a sin, but not mortally so. (Well unless your going to use it to by food to keep your family form starving to death). Taking $20 form a poor man would most likely be a mortal.

But in this case you’re not taking $20 from a rich guy, really. What you ARE doing is stealing from each of the poor working-class Joes who slave their butts off for low wages behind the scenes on a movie set. And if the movie doesn’t break even because no-one’s buying the DVDs you can bet it’s not going to be the stars with pricey lawyers to fight for them who are the ones who won’t get paid their salaries :nope:

 

[faqcorner]

But in this case you’re not taking $20 from a rich guy, really. What you ARE doing is stealing from each of the poor working-class Joes who slave their butts off for low wages behind the scenes on a movie set. And if the movie doesn’t break even because no-one’s buying the DVDs you can bet it’s not going to be the stars with pricey lawyers to fight for them who are the ones who won’t get paid their salaries :nope:

note: not all actors are poor. some are quite rich apparently (though cause I don’t watch those kinds of stuff → movies, dramas, etc that much I don’t know most of the rich ones.

just noting that (as you are technically putting all the actors under the “poor working class”

 

[LilyM]

note: not all actors are poor. some are quite rich apparently (though cause I don’t watch those kinds of stuff → movies, dramas, etc that much I don’t know most of the rich ones.

just noting that (as you are technically putting all the actors under the “poor working class”

No I’m not - on the contrary. I mean the lowly members of the film crew will be the first to be denied their pay, not the actors and actrines.

 

[masterjedi747]

Taking $20 form a rich guy is a sin, but not mortally so. (Well unless your going to use it to by food to keep your family form starving to death). Taking $20 form a poor man would most likely be a mortal.

This is correct.
When the value of what is stolen exceeds “grave sum”, the sin shifts from venial to mortal.

Furthermore, see these:
Is Downloading Music a sin?
Is downloading music always sinful?

And this: Catholic Encyclopedia: Theft

Regarding the “downloading music” question:

“Theft is the secret taking of another’s property against the reasonable will of that other.
…For the notion of theft, the unwilingness of the owner to part with what is rightfully his, is essential. If he be content, or if under some circumstances he can legitimately be presumed to be satisfied with what is done although perhaps displeased at the manner of its doing, there is no theft properly so called.”

Regarding the matter of “grave sum”:

"The sin of theft is of itself grievous, because it violates the great virtues of justice and charity. …Still, as happens with regard to other delinquencies, its guilt may often be venial. This is particularly true when the value of what is filched is inconsiderable, or as the theologians say, is not grave matter. The determination of what is grave matter, whose taking, namely, is prohibited under pain of mortal sin, is beset with great difficulties and has offered room for widespread difference of opinion. …That amount is clearly not a constant quantity. It will vary according to the circumstances of the person injured as well as of place and time in which commodities may be more or less valuable. It will even take account of the special relationship which perchance the thief holds to the one he has despoiled, as when children steal from their parents. The sum so ascertained is termed the relatively grave matter. Thus the theft of an amount equal to a day’s wages from an ordinary artisan would unquestionably be a mortal sin. The same thing must be said of the taking of an insignificant sum from a beggar. Theologians teach that this method of establishing the grievousness of theft cannot be employed indefinitely and exclusively. There is an absolute sum which it is always a mortal sin to take even from the wealthiest person or corporation.

 

[LJN21]

Thread resurrection?

I’m was not condoning stealing songs or movies off the internet by any stretch, I was just saying that downloading songs while sinful, is not mortally so, as some people were trying to convince the poor guy it was.

Three things required for a Mortal Sin:

1. It must be of Grave matter
2. You must know fully the seriousness of the sin.
3. You must give full consent of the will.

But in this case you’re not taking $20 from a rich guy, really. What you ARE doing is stealing from each of the poor working-class Joes who slave their butts off for low wages behind the scenes on a movie set. And if the movie doesn’t break even because no-one’s buying the DVDs you can bet it’s not going to be the stars with pricey lawyers to fight for them who are the ones who won’t get paid their salaries

Thats a bit of over dramatic. The damage to the average Joe for stealing something like this are some what difficult to quantify. A brand new dvd costs ~$20 of that about ~$10 of that is left after you take out all the manufacturing and marketing costs. Out of whats left take out the profit the DVD company keeps, the cut to the directors, writers and actors, oh and the cost of reformatting the movie for DVD. Anyway, the actual amount per movie is significantly less than $20.

Again I’m not saying its okay, cause it isn’t - it is definitely stealing and definitely sinful, increasingly so the more stolen intellectual property you own. The ONLY thing I was auguring against in this thread was everyone jumping on the “Oh Noes, you commented a mortal sin band wagon” 'cause you can’t comment a mortal sin if you don’t know its one, and that whole grave mater part.