The morality of YouTube

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriousOrder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GloriousOrder

Guest
Friends, let me be clear! We are not talking about legality and illegality in this question, but morality and immorality. A great many immoral things are legal, after all, and many potentially morally good actions are illegal across the world. Search your heart!

YouTube presents some very specific moral problems. Is it right to view professional, high-quality music videos (which are created for the purpose of generating income) for free on this website? The potential immorality of viewing and saving these videos/audio on YouTube, however, really tortures me. Is it right to listen to music that may likely (or very probably!) be stolen and placed on YouTube? What if a music video by, say, Paramount was legitimately purchased by the person who subsequently put it on YouTube, but without the permission of Paramount? Is this person said to ontologically own the music video once it has been traded for his money, or can Paramount morally retract the video from YouTube? What of those who listen to it?

What if some music (say, Palestrina) is so beautiful that it makes me glorify God with many tears of joy? What if it’s a Catholic video that makes me grow in faith so strongly that I’d be worse off if I hadn’t seen it? In the first case, would I be violating the natural law and the moral law with regard to the Hilliard Ensemble or The Sixteen who own the rights to the income of that music? In the second case, would I be violating the natural law and the moral law with regard to the Catholic author or speaker? This is really a bother to my soul! 😦
 
Well…first thing first…There is no problems in watching videos that are put on by the artist or record label…(you can usually tell by the name)…I’ve thought about this too and my own kind of rule of thumb is if the video has alot of views and has been on there for more than 2 years it is likely the artist/label knows about it and doesn’t care to remove it…I used to watch some live springsteen stuff which SONY eventually removed…i didn’t really know they didn’t want it on there but they removed it so be it…Whatever it is though it shouldn’t trouble you that much…And there is such a thing as fair use…Using the song to make some sort of politcal or religious statement…

I wouldn’t say it’s any kind of sin to watch a video that has a slideshow of religious images with a religious song…or at least not big sin…If it bothers you though just don’t watch stuff you believe is for sale…if it was not put on there by the label or artist…I find no problem though in say watching some sort of newsmaking moments that have been put on youtube…Manning to Tyree comes to mind for me after the super bowl…I guess it all comes down to intent…If the artist is any good though they usually put up their music videos…I wouldn’t watch a whole movie say because you didn’t want to buy it…but if there is a funny scene or something i don’t see a problem in that really…It is complicated but lets end abortion, hunger, war, homelessness, etc…before we worry about youtube…Hope this helps, it is a tough digital age but i wouldn’t spend hours worrying about it…listen to you conscience i guess :tiphat:
 
Well, if you really want to know what’s going on, start here:

dailyfinance.com/story/viacom-appeals-flawed-1-billion-youtube-verdict/19590425/

The company Viacom sued youtube alleging infringement of its rights. Due to a “safe harbor” law, it is up to rights holders to request to have their work removed as opposed to youtube having that responsibility. Viacom lost but has appealed. This is a serious moral issue. The company and individuals that have the rights to a work (music, movie or video) should not have their work reproduced without permission or compensation, unless the work was meant to be distributed for free.

Peace,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top