A question about the morality of internet piracy

[Lamont_Cranston]

I'm going to assume that not everyone here is as computer literate as I am and explain what I mean by internet piracy and the important ways it differs from corporeal theft.

When I say internet piracy I'm referring to the act of obtaining a digital copy of something through an unofficial method of distribution without paying the person(s) that created the original. In most cases I assume that the person who started distributing it themselves purchased their own copy.

There's nothing taken away from anyone by the act of duplicating a file so it has little if anything in common with the traditional concept of theft which involves physically removing another person's property from their possession.

Some such as the RIAA and MPAA would claim that by sharing music and movies with others that I'm stealing "potential profits", depriving them of sales that they would have otherwise made. I can accomplish the exact same thing by telling other people what I think of the majority of movies I see and most of the songs I hear on the radio because they're not any good.

As for me I wouldn't pay for most of the things that I download because they're not any good. The JJ Abrams Star Trek movie was so bad that if I had paid to see it I would have walked out 10 minutes into it and asked for my money back. Then there are other things that I end up purchasing that I would have never known existed had I not downloaded them.

Anyway post whatever Bible verses you're aware of that could be seen as dealing with intellectual property. Your own opinions are welcome as well.

 

[Pete_Martinez]

Well this was one of the things the Lord convicted me of, I have most if not all illegal things deleted from my computer. The only way I will download anything is if I have the original copy, which is what you are legally allowed to do, which is why most of these sites exist. On the should I pay only if it's good; well that would be like you going to work and having your boss say to you, well you came to work and did the time but you didn't do a very good job so i'm not paying you. Now you may say, well most of this stuff is from hollywood and they're richer than they know what to do with, well true, but even then, by downloading, buying, etc. anything from a certain director or studio, you're giving them money to produce more of the same. Or by watching you're giving them more of a market to produce more of the same. I remember hearing about one who came out of the porn production industry... "The consumer is just as guilty as those who produce these things, they are the ones who provide the demand in the first place."

 

[Pete_Martinez]

And by most things I mean stuff I may have on my machine that may be hiding somewhere, I formatted my machine not too long ago.

 

[MahogonySnail]

It's stealing basically. Acquiring something that you did not legitimately pay for.

 

[dscherck]

I don't think there's an issue if you've purchased a copy and lost it. I lost the disc to one of my games I bought and downloaded a copy of said disc. And I've downloaded music from CDs I've lost or had damaged before. But beyond that I avoid it. If I can't afford something then I'll wait till I can.

 

[phil36]

It's basically theft, there is no other way to say it. dscherk, brought up an interesting point, the records comapnies will allow you to make a copy if you have purchased the original.

It is no different that walking into a shop and stealing something, just because it is so easy to do online, does not change the fact that it is theft.

Phil

 

[Lamont_Cranston]

It is no different that walking into a shop and stealing something, just because it is so easy to do online, does not change the fact that it is theft.

Phil

It's definitely different than going into a shop and stealing something. When you steal something tangible the person that you stole it from no longer has it. You have deprived them of property.

Downloading a file is much more analogous to going into a shop, magically producing an exact duplicate of a product that they are selling, then walking out with the duplicate. All of the shop's property is still in place. Nothing is missing.

You can't hold a computer file in your hand. It's an intangible and in most cases exceedingly long sequence of 1s and 0s magnetically stored on a hard drive.


With a powerful enough computer and enough time I could cycle through every possible binary value for a valid 4MB mp3 file and create a reasonable facsimile of every musical performance capable of being compressed to that file size using that format. Most of the mp3s produced would just be random noise but some of them would be indistinguishable from a Beatles performance. Some of them would even sound like bands that don't exist yet performing songs that have yet to be written.

 

[feelhim]

Yeah I know I'm reviving an old thread, but intellectual property doesn't exist. No such thing at "intellectual theft". /thread. Copyright is a made-up construct, therefore, e-piracy isn't wrong. If I take a picture of your famous painting, it isn't wrong. If I TAKE YOUR FAMOUS PAINTING (as in the canvas that it was painted on), that's wrong. Same concept applies for all things electronic. If someone copies the data that makes songs, it's not stealing. If someone takes someone else's PHYSICAL cd, that's stealing.

I'm going to assume that not everyone here is as computer literate as I am and explain what I mean by internet piracy and the important ways it differs from corporeal theft.

When I say internet piracy I'm referring to the act of obtaining a digital copy of something through an unofficial method of distribution without paying the person(s) that created the original. In most cases I assume that the person who started distributing it themselves purchased their own copy.

There's nothing taken away from anyone by the act of duplicating a file so it has little if anything in common with the traditional concept of theft which involves physically removing another person's property from their possession.

Some such as the RIAA and MPAA would claim that by sharing music and movies with others that I'm stealing "potential profits", depriving them of sales that they would have otherwise made. I can accomplish the exact same thing by telling other people what I think of the majority of movies I see and most of the songs I hear on the radio because they're not any good.

As for me I wouldn't pay for most of the things that I download because they're not any good. The JJ Abrams Star Trek movie was so bad that if I had paid to see it I would have walked out 10 minutes into it and asked for my money back. Then there are other things that I end up purchasing that I would have never known existed had I not downloaded them.

Anyway post whatever Bible verses you're aware of that could be seen as dealing with intellectual property. Your own opinions are welcome as well.

 

[Depleted]

Yeah I know I'm reviving an old thread, but intellectual property doesn't exist. No such thing at "intellectual theft". /thread. Copyright is a made-up construct, therefore, e-piracy isn't wrong. If I take a picture of your famous painting, it isn't wrong. If I TAKE YOUR FAMOUS PAINTING (as in the canvas that it was painted on), that's wrong. Same concept applies for all things electronic. If someone copies the data that makes songs, it's not stealing. If someone takes someone else's PHYSICAL cd, that's stealing.

Well, then, okay. So can you tell me where you keep your pictures of the day you went to the museum or the day you went to some famous statue, so I can claim credit for your pictures?

Got any videos, songs, or blogs on the Internet? According to your self-justification I can steal them and call them my own too because I'm merely "copying the data."

For that matter, I can even copy/paste this very post you made, because it's just coding.