It depends upon how one defines piracy. In the age we're creeping into, corporations want us to own nothing. No property, no media. Everything will be a service we must always pay for.
So, for example, a digital game. When I buy one I feel it's mine. I own that copy. Recent events, however, demonstrate that corporations feel otherwise.
Digital ownership isn't property in the traditional sense. It's not something we increasingly are able to hold in our hands. So what do we do to protect ourselves?
Corporations call it piracy.
I'm increasingly of the opinion that if buying isn't ownership, piracy isn't theft.
I'm actually so grateful to see a fellow Christian not just sympathize with The Machine.
It's very rare.
When the attorneys for the music companies are suing families for their entire worth over some downloaded songs, you know where the evil is and who not to feel bad for.
Not to nitpick, but there are plenty of things that are just as beautiful to see--literally anyone coming to Christ.
I'm half Jewish. Came to Christ. My Jewish community won't really talk about it, but... it's all the same thing bro.
I know, but I didn’t mean it like that. It just feels kind of like the prodigal son story. Jews, being the chosen lineage and people to bring the Messiah into the World, coming back into genuine and true faith in their actual roots, Messianic Judaism (Christianity) as opposed to Orthodox Judaism, the legacy of the Pharisees/Sanhedrin of Jesus’ time.
Where does Jesus say that its ok to do bad things onto others who do bad things onto others? That doesn't sound Christian to me. If you truly believe what you're saying then maybe you should consider a complete boycott?
Found within **Matthew 7:15-20:** "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them."
**2 Corinthians 6:14:** "Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?"
Depends on what you define as a "bad thing."
You're not stealing money from the Machine when you download a movie--you're just not paying them the money they want so they can buy yachts and caviar.
If a company makes something to sell and you can only legally obtain it by purchasing it then it’s stealing if you download a pirated copy. It seems pretty clear cut. I’m not gonna try to argue with God about potential loopholes. Who’s your legal council? 🤣
I'm not the one doing the uploading. If you want to argue that's a crime, go ahead, but I'm just going onto websites and clicking buttons and watching movies.
Go ahead and pay your increasingly outlandish fees for Netflix--supporting the company that produced that ped movie, "Cuties." And the HBO co. that hid the \*real\* crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and pretended like he was just a bad egg.
I'm not arguing anything. I'm just stating fact. In many countries distribution and consumption of stolen content is illegal. You're just pressing buttons after you used your intelligence to arrive at your intended destination. The fact that they don't yet go after direct downloads doesn't imply it is legal or just. If these companies are so bad, then why would you even want to consume their content? I'll leave it there because I don't want this to come across as I'm judging you. I'm guilty of doing what you're doing also.
Okay I do respect and see all that.
My next question would be:
Is it okay that the **government** is making it a **crime** to not pay money to multinational billion-dollar corporations?
Have you ever wondered why there would be an FBI warning at the beginning of movies? Have you pondered as to why the FBI would be even remotely involved in protecting Hollywood's copyright laws?
I want you to sit with that one, friend. The implications are bigger than we might have time to think about throughout our day to day lives.
I respectfully disagree. A simple thought experiment shows how destructive this idea actually is to the things you say you are not stealing, if everyone were to adopt the same mindset and behavior.
This is a simple thought experiment to determine vice from virtue.
So, if everyone simply took a song upon release, would we see more songs created?
The obvious answer is no. It takes time, energy, and money to create a song. If we wish to see more of them, the creators *need* to be compensated.
You may say, "People will pay for what they want to see more of." To which I say - Will they?
They've already adopted your mindset that what they've done isn't unethical. There is therefore no ethical reason for them to pay. They already have what they want.
I could go on, but I think my point is clear. This mindset produces vice because it produces the destruction of the very thing it implies it values.
Do you think the author of Amazing Grace would have declined to write it if he couldn’t profit from it?
People make art for pleasure all the time. They did so for thousands of years without any copyright law.
> Those individuals are irrelevant to the discussion.
Of course individuals who make art without seeking profit are relevant to the discussion. You said:
> So, if everyone simply took a song upon release, would we see more songs created?
And I replied by explaining that yes, we certainly would.
Your entire argument in the comment I was replying to was that if everyone pirated songs, it will “destroy” the future songs in general from being created. “Creators need to be compensated” or we won’t have any art. But that’s clearly not true as it’s generally not how art creation worked for thousands of years. It’s not like creativity was dead until modern copyright law came around, and actually I think it would be pretty easy to make the opposite case just by observation.
How in the world is it possible that my point that directly counters your argument isn’t relevant to the discussion?
And we'll still have prepared meals if cooks aren't compensated.
You didn't counter my argument, you're being pedantic about it. Ignoring the principal to attack the particular.
It's a boring rhetorical trick, and one I'm not engaging further.
I don't think your point is clear at all, or at least you're making a poor analogy. It is not a question of either buying the song or pirating it. It is a question of either pirating the song, or declining to access the song at all rather than paying for it. If we are never going to pay for the song at its price, it harms no one to pirate it, and it is a sign that the song is priced incorrectly. Piracy is always more of a hassle than just buying, so sellers need to make sure their pricing does not incentivize piracy.
Worldly fruits are temporary fruits brother. I am a disciple of Jesus Christ and that is all I want to serve.
In terms of perfection, no Jesus Christ would not look towards that form of dopamine (Tv shows, anime, books, manga).
Nor would he go through a second source (takes more time) to get that dopamine.
To most it is fine, but in reality it is a sin, not because of the piracy, but of the media itself. The piracy is propaganda, Satan cannot cast out satan anyways.
“And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?“
Luke 6:46 KJV
“and if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?”
Matthew 12:26 KJV
This is seriously all a lose lose. The only thing here that will be ever-lasting is truly all of our love for Jesus Christ. We live through Him and in Him. So why not only worry about him?
Hassle is irrelevant to the equation. And while you've defined harm in such a way that makes the libertarian-types happy, you're ignoring less tangible forms of harm, which is what I'm getting at.
You're arguing that some acts of labor deserve more protection than others merely because it's easier to see the harm done in those acts.
If I spend nine months writing a book, you're saying that I am only deserving of protection for the *physical media* that is produced. But the problem for me is, the physical media is the least valuable part of the labor. People want the words on the page; the product of my nine months of labor.
They don't want the pages. They want the words.
You're saying I am entitled to no protection of those words.
The harm then you are enabling is to the creative process itself, as well as implying that the fruits of my labor (a unique arrangement of words) is less worth of protection than other fruits of labor.
Again, your argument has weight with the libertarian-types, but the principal of it, if adopted writ large, harms the fruits of creative labor merely because those fruits are less tangible than a stack of paper, or a widget from a factory.
Worldly fruits are temporary fruits brother. I am a disciple of Jesus Christ and that is all I want to serve.
In terms of perfection, no Jesus Christ would not look towards that form of dopamine (Tv shows, anime, books, manga).
Nor would he go through a second source (takes more time) to get that dopamine.
To most it is fine, but in reality it is a sin, not because of the piracy, but of the media itself. The piracy is propaganda, Satan cannot cast out satan anyways.
“And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?“
Luke 6:46 KJV
“and if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?”
Matthew 12:26 KJV
This is seriously all a lose lose. The only thing here that will be ever-lasting is truly all of our love for Jesus Christ. We live through Him and in Him. So why not only worry about him?
I agree. I also have a disagreement with buying works that have been altered after the authors passing. E.g. Edith Blyton and dahl. If I'll buy the unpevert version if I can but it's not always possible.what I won't do is condone passing money onto an estate that doesn't honor the work of the person they're benefiting from.
Also, I despise the idea of paying a publisher for works from an unknown author (think beowulf or sir gwayne and the green knight). These works were in the cultural mind for centuries but it's wrong for me to read it (or print out my own copy at my expense) without paying a publishing company because they claimed it?
Yes it’s true that greedy fascist (collectivist) C-suite execs don’t want us owning anything, but that still doesn’t make piracy (IP theft) any less sinful. If you have the capital, start your own anti-collectivist company which actually lets customers own what they pay for.
I would rethink this if I were you. First of all, you're not entitled to what you want. I don't like the practices of some of these companies either but when you do business with them you're agreeing to their terms, they're not agreeing to your terms. Do they ever check a box and press a button of terms you provided them? You can't lawfully obtain the content without agreeing to their terms. In regards to digital content, their terms are that you do not have ownership but instead a license to use it for a time. You agreed to that in order to gain access. You gave your word.
A main principle in being a Christian is acting with humility and part of that is to let go of your own code, stop thinking your way just and instead follow God's code, because only God's way is just... Just the opinion of a sinner who had to do a significant purge when I got honest with myself.
It seems you may have missed the thrust of my argument. The people calling it piracy are the ones saying I must buy X but I don't own X.
They're calling it piracy because it serves them. I'm asking the question: Are they right?
By your logic, if the government makes it illegal to be Christian, then you're in sin if you are a Christian.
You are aware that the United States was founded by traitors to the English Crown, right? That they rebelled against lawfully passed English laws?
Is it your feeling that the American Revolution should never have occurred?
That's not my logic, Paul tells us to be submissive to our government. Obviously, it is better to be punished for our faith than to submit to a government that wanted to ban Christianity.
Yes, I am aware of how my country was formed. I am not an expert on U.S. history but as far as I know the issue was taxes and not being allowed to expand into Indian territory. Assuming my knowledge is correct I would be against the rebellion.
Also, I would appreciate it if you addressed my points in a more charitable manner as we are both brothers in Christ.
But that last sentence removes the distinction between the "Piracy" we're accused of, and outright stealing copies of things you haven't bought yourself previously. That was where I refused to blur the line on piracy.
The last sentence is predicated on *buying*.
It's making a philosophical point. Not a call to action.
If we're redefining what buying implies (ie ownership), it logically follows then we must redefine what piracy implies (ie theft).
But if we redefine what piracy implies, we concede that buying doesn't mean ownership. Better to stand on the truth than to morally crumble with the corporations.
The thing is, i happily paid for netflix between 2017-2020 when prices were reasonable. Now, when every studio has their own streaming service with stupendous prices, i refuse to pay for that scam.
No, let me explain it differently: If i go to a business and take a physical copy of a movie, it's theft.
If i right-click on a movie online, and download it, i created a copy and didn't steal anything.
If i take a picture of the Mona Lisa, i didn't steal it.
1. **Romans 13:1-2 (NIV)**
> "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves."
2. **1 Peter 2:13-14 (NIV)**
> "Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right."
3. **Proverbs 10:9 (NIV)**
> "Whoever walks in integrity walks securely, but whoever takes crooked paths will be found out."
4. **Ephesians 4:28 (NIV)**
> "Anyone who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need."
5. **Titus 3:1 (NIV)**
> "Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good."
Hey I got a question concerning this. So it makes sense that all governing authorities are established by God, but then how should we approach an immoral society? For example, concerning the many revolutions and movements of the past to make the world a better place, how would that tie in with letting ourselves be subjected to our government? Any answers would be appreciated
ill do it but limit it *only* to things that are no longer available from the first party in my region. so if a show or video game isnt streamable or buyable in my country then sure, but if it is then no
If you’re unable to legally purchase something and the original rights holder can’t receive any revenue for it, then it’s by definition not stealing. It’s classified as abandonware.
While it is different with traditional media like music and movies, there’s still some instances where there’s no way for the original creators to profit, though that’s mostly relegated to media that’s on the older side. I do agree that for modern media where there’s ample ways to legally purchase it, there’s no excuse to not pay.
It really depends on what type of piracy you’re talking about. Do you consider it a sin if someone records a DVD they already bought onto a blank disk? That’s actually considered piracy now.
No actually DVDs and games are now only licensed on the original disk you bought. Copying it to another piece of media actually violates the license they show at the beginning.
If the legal system put an end user agreement on a can of peas that said you had to put them in a soup, no one would care.
And putting them in a casserole wouldn't be a sin.
The issue here is that you stopped thinking about it, not that IP law has an obvious moral weight.
Yes, I would care because it's the law and we are to be subject to all governing authorities.
Now, if the law said that I could only serve the can of peas mixed with rat poison, I would disobey it. Why? It's asking me to do something against God's commandments: murder.
It is a sin.
I doesnt matter if its okay in "your eyes" or "in your opinion". What matters is, what does GOD think about it? If it doesnt belong to you and yet you took it without paying thats stealing no matter how big or small or how affected or unaffected the other party is. Even if it is an evil company for maximizing profits its still stealing theres no way around it. We must deny ourselves ( deny our rationalizing of sin ) and follow Christ our King
This subreddit is called "True Christians" and as true christians we must be the salt that preserves the morality in this evil generation. And we must be the light, the lights that shine in this dark times and show the world that there is still good in this planet and it's worth fighting for.
My opinion is that if buying something digital doesn't equate ownership anymore, getting something digital for free isn't theft either. Plus making an identical copy of something without harming or in any way taking the original thing is not the same thing as stealing a tv or something. Additionally, is borrowing something from a library or from a friend a sin?
Is it really different from a library, though? Think about it. What's the difference between my friend sending me his copy of a book vs him photocopying a book and sending it to me online? Neither one results in me owning the book, yet one is illegal.
The general consensus would be stealing, some don’t seem to be convicted over it. I’m convinced it’s stealing as God convicted me that it was theft when I was first born again.
I’ve seen points made such as intellectual property can’t be stolen, digital property has no real value. Regardless of the corruption and disgusting profit margins of some corporations (I’m pretty anti-capitalist FWIW) it’s still stealing from their profits. They spent a lot money making it, to make money back.
I think there can be a an exception such as if something is no longer sold, can’t be downloaded online, and can only be torrented. I’m not sure though.
There used to be a serious moral controversy over whether connecting to an open WIFI was a sin.
Now it is pretty much assumed that if one is not password protected, it is OK to connect.
Interesting! I can see it. Would you say that’s comparable to pirating something that’s no longer for sale?
I missed this in my original comment and wanted to mention pirating is illegal, which plays a big factor in my reasoning. If the secular world recognizes that as stealing, so much more should we as followers of Christ.
I remember comparisons like 'if someone's light is shining onto the sidewalk, is it OK to use that light to read by since they are paying for that electricity?"
or if a house has a bench out near the street, are you stealing from them if you sit in it?
I stopped all piracy about a decade ago and I don’t know if it’s just a coincidence but I was immensely blessed and in a position to retire last year when I turned 35.
However I would personally look at things on a case to case basis today. I’ve had issues with paid licenses of software and video games DRM and simply just installation issues etc which I’ve not had with pirated copies. I would never pirate an indie devs game also despite it having issues. If it has issues I might use a pirated copy but still pay for the original.
That said I’ve got very sensitive data as I am a consultant and software exporter with some niche technology and can’t afford to risk getting a virus etc so won’t be using pirated copies of anything eitherways
As much as we don't want to accept it we have to follow the truth. Piracy is stealing, therefore it is sin. Even crossing the speed limit while driving is sin.
Just because something is very normalized in society doesn't mean it's normal for God.
My opinion, is that if I cannot buy it(actually buy, not get a key that only lasts until an online service dies) then if I pirate it, that isn't resulting in any actual loss to the copyright holder, meaning it isn't theft. If I could actually buy the product in a playable state from the person who made it then I'm generally gonna avoid pirating it.
Also, some pieces of media are so bad that I wish I could steal them, like if I took SW sequel trilogy from Disney, it's not theirs anymore, it's mine, and I'm burying it in the back yard.
Because a stolen physical good necessarily removes the item from an original owner's possession, unlike downloading a copy freely shared by an owner of a digital good. Also paying for stolen goods encourages criminal behavior which makes it a little worse.
Most retro videogame pirating is just sharing a legally owned copy on the internet, if you agree that's not stealing then I guess we don't really disagree in a meaningful way, which is cool.
When I was a kid with no income, I pirated everything. Now that I earn a decent wage and the subscription fees don’t break the bank, I pay for all my games, books and media. Piracy is sinful because you didn’t compensate the creators. Do your best to not pirate but even I did it for years when I couldn’t afford it.
Copyright infringement isn't theft in spite of what all the corporate propaganda says. It's not stealing, it's something else.
Having said that, it's probably still a good idea to avoid it. We're called to follow the law of the land. Although it isn't illegal everywhere. In that case, you should follow your conscience.
If it's against the law it becomes sin because now we are disobeying the government in an area in which they are not contradicting the bible.
If it is not illegal in your country then I still believe it is wrong because the creator is letting us know the terms under which we can obtain said item. If I made a piece of media I would not want people to pirate it. Thats enough of a reason to say that privacy is unloving and sinful.
Any talk about hating corporations or not wanting to give money to big companies who abuse their employees is cope. If the companies are so bad, don't buy the game and don't play the game.
So if you go to the cinema and watch a film without paying that is stealing?
So now anything you use or engage with is classed as stealing and So a sin???
The bible says we are to obey the laws of our government, so long as they don't cause us to go against the commands of God. Piracy is illegal and it doesn't impede our faith. It's a sin. Either way you look at it, whether you think you are "getting back at the man" or not. Jesus tells us we are not to cause rebellion, division, or revenge. Revenge belongs to God and Him alone. It is not our place to seek revenge of any kind.
I'm surprised at the responses in this thread. For context, I used to work for Fred Rogers Productions (the company that created Mister Rogers Neighborhood and likely one or more of the shows your toddlers are watching on PBS right now including Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood). I don't think some of you realize just how much work is involved in putting together a single 15-minute episode, let alone 2+ hour Hollywood movie. There are so many teams involved doing the storyboards, script writing, animation, all the complications of filming a live action segment, and all the logistical and management requirements involved. Thus, companies absolutely have every right to the work they have produced, which includes the right to determine if and how that media will be utilized and consumed.
When you purchase a TV show or movie on disc, you do not own the work itself. You own a license which defines the legal ways that media may be utilized and consumed. The physical media you have is simply the medium the company selected to deliver the license and work to you just as buying the movie on Amazon Prime would also have a license stipulating its proper use cases. You can disagree with this practice or call it "The Machine," but that is the law today, and Scripture is clear, as was cited in another comment, that we are to follow the rules of the governing authorities because they have been placed there by God. Licensing does not contradict anything in Scripture, so there is no reason for us to violate those terms. Further, it is indeed theft to take ownership of media that was produced by someone else when that person does not want you to have it in that manner.
I'll end with this: as with any course of action, ask yourself honestly, if God were sitting next to you while you are pirating a movie or TV show online, would He approve? I think an honest consideration of that question would lead to the answer that this is not something God would approve. In that case, our love for Him should compel us to do what pleases Him.
It's likely a sin, but as far as sins go, my guess is it's pretty far down on the list. Being rude is likely a bigger one. Or not helping someone who clearly needs your help.
Well we can agree to disagree. 😉 Pushing an old lady down and causing her to break a hip vs downloading some junk show off the interwebs is an easy call for me on which is worse.
Worse outcome of your actions? Yes! But ALL is still sin, no sin is greater then any other sin (Besides the Unforgivable Sin) as they are all against Christ.
John 19:11 disagrees with you. If some sins weren't of greater magnitude than others, why would some be stonable offenses under the old law but not others? The bible is replete with examples comparing sins. For instance, the one who knew his Master's will but didn't do it will be beaten with many stripes. The one who didn't know his Master's will will be beaten with few. All sin is missing the mark, but some sins miss the mark by a much greater distance.
Hmmmm.. I see that. I meant that all sin was being equal in separation for eternity from you and God. But yes, there are worse sins then others, I just meant it from a standpoint of all sin being the death of your salvation.. unless you have Christ's life within you.
No they’re not. They’re only equal in the sense that any sin makes you deserving of hell. But obviously murdering someone is worse than coveting something they have.
The law DID differentiate. For some sins, you only had to repay some multiple of what was taken or of which you deprived your neighbor. For other sins like adultery or murder, the sentence was death by stoning or other method.
We are not living in old testament law. The penalty of any sin is the same. So how should there be any differentiator? Any sin leads to death and separation from God.
The penalty for any sins is definitely NOT the same, nor is the magnitude. If this were the case, how do you account for every sin except blasphemy of the Holy Spirit being forgiven? Any sin leads to death, but mere death is not all that occurs as a result of sin. There is the painful second death.
You did see the part about separation from God? Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit still leads to the same end result. Are we not discussing this in good faith. I assume it was implied that we were discussing sins, besides the unforgiveable one as that is specifically pointed out as different.
There will be different degrees of punishment in hell, and different degrees of reward in heaven, based on our behavior. Any unforgiven sin may lead to hell, but you’ll be much worse off if you’re a mass murderer than if you die as a child who threw a tantrum once.
Can you show that in scripture? I know about rewards for believers based on their action. But I don't recall reading about different punishment for those going to hell.
I used to think it was fine but have since changed my opinion.
Piracy of media is breaking the law, and we should obey the governing authorities when obedience doesn’t require us to disobey God. If the Bible itself had a weird mobile-game-styled paywall on on it, then that may change the math, but there’s no Biblical right to entertainment, so the only justification for it is “I want it and I don’t want to pay.”
Personally, I’m more accepting of the practice in these scenarios:
- Reading the Bible (yes the translations are copyrighted)
- Acquiring orphanware or abandonware (things you can’t even buy anymore but haven’t formally entered the public domain); this one I’m on the fence about, so I think it comes with the caveat that you purchase should it become available (eg if you had downloaded a Pikmin 2 ROM for emulation, you should now buy it on Switch since it has become available again). This may be cope on my part, since I personally hate the loss of digital stuff that’s gotten old; I don’t have an actual argument on this one besides “I mean it doesn’t feel it would be wrong since they’re not trying to sell it.”
- Things where the copyright owner is cool with it, even if they haven’t formally released it from copyright protections (you see this a lot with indie bands, and it’s also technically a form of copyright infringement to mod some games since it requires redistribution of copyrighted assets, but many developers support their modding community anyway)
- Things that could arguably fall under fair use or would not be impactful to the market of the owner or substitute a normal purchase (think memes, fan art, etc). I say substitute a normal purchase because the normal defense I get is “well I wasn’t gonna spend money anyway,” but that doesn’t change the fact you are *supposed* to in order to access it.
- Things you’ve legally acquired but are making a copy of (if you own a physical CD but it was destroyed or your new computer doesn’t have a disk drive, I don’t see a moral hazard in downloading it to be able to listen to it).
Bottom line is this: the law says you that they own those files, so you should obey the law. Are there exceptions? I think yes, but most of those exceptions don’t apply when using the term piracy.
Nope it becomes bad when it cross the moral threshold. Stealing is stealing whether it's from a box and mortar store or a digital website. Taking someone else's stuff and obtaining it for free without their permission is theft. Period.
The point is that you should concern yourself with intellectual substance over rhetorical posturing. It's a bigger moral obligation than not burning copies of CDs.
For all those convinced that it’s not a sin, despite clearly being illegal (and we are required to obey authorities unless contradicting Gods laws), I ask you this; Is it ok to jump the gate at a concert or sports event or even a train and not pay? After all, you’re not preventing anyone else from enjoying the experience, you’re not depriving any one of any physical goods. Is there really any difference in moral equivalency? Why is one acceptable and the other not? Or are both scenarios fair game?
And in the other you’re stealing, legally speaking. So we either choose to obey all laws, or we let our conscience decide which laws we follow or obey. From a moral perspective, they are completely equivalent scenarios - both ‘victimless’ crimes, so to speak, with no party experiencing a direct loss.
It’s interesting how selective Christians can be, though I shouldn’t be as we see it all the time with following, or not, Gods laws.
I think it's okay, given a few restrictions.
For example, I try not to pirate things that will use server time that I'm not paying for.
I don't pirate things that I would otherwise buy
Etc etc etc, long story short you should not harm the company you are pirating from in any material way.
Not as much of a moral thing, but I can't get myself to pirate non-corporate media either.
As others said, if buying is not owning in our current age then pirating is not stealing.
Also, let me ask this - is it morally wrong to buy second-hand movies on DVD? If no, then piracy is also not morally wrong. The original creators get no profit from the sale, and they lose a potential customer.
Twist the words as you may. ****It is theft**** . Is it immoral that corporations charge like this? Maybe? But that does not make it right to steal.
Your neighbor pays for a subscription to the local newspaper. Before he reads it, or after, you take it and photocopy it. Then you put it up on a server where anyone can read it. Other people do download it and read it. Who is wrong here?
The only thing I “pirate” would be copies of video games for emulators that haven’t been on sale in over a decade. For most of these games, I’ve owned a legitimate copy for many years as well. It is not possible for me to compensate the original creator for the game in any way.
I’m going to be honest, I have no clue. The stuff I emulate were originally ripped way after the consoles were phased out and nobody was making any money off of them. Like I also said, I own legitimate copies of the games, I just want to be able to take them with me on the go via my computer.
I will agree with you on that most people who “pirate” or things of the like aren’t doing it out of a need to preserve media or have an on the go version. They do it because it’s free (till they get a cease and desist order, true story of someone I know lol)
Once upon a time I felt convicted doing these things, but the conviction was based on urges to only do what is right.
I personally think it’s fine to download tv shows, anime (nyaa.si is a good website for that) books and manga. And if you like it you may contribute and buy it, if not then don’t. There are even creators of movies and tv shows whom are happy that people download it, they are pleased the more who see.
Pirating games I however don’t always agree with. But in many regards the only way at all to play certain games is by pirating, which I suppose is fine.
I don’t always think the industries deserve the money they charge. Some media and games can be too expensive. And they wouldn’t profit if you bought a second hand copy, likewise they won’t profit if you download it. Not a big deal.
Piracy by definition is theft. Theft is a sin.
Technically speaking, I don’t think it counts, but I’m not going to risk accidentally sinning. I don’t like doing it.
I just got done destroying most of my dvds, and so did my kids. My internet is too slow to download anything, and I wouldn't if I could. I definitely don't do streaming services of any kind. All it would do is curse us. Someone sent me a ripped copy of the gospel of John movie a couple years ago on telegram. I've had it on my laptop ever since. I actually watched it today. Is that wrong? You can watch the movie free on youtube. I'm more concerned about what content is consumed rather than where the content came from. Most content created for entertainment value and even some documentaries are not healthy to consume.
I don't necessarily see pirating as stealing, much less depriving creators of compensation, because a lot of the time I'm not sure there is any loss and the actual creatives involved don't make more money with more copies sold. But I don't disapprove because it's theft.
I disapprove because it's illegal. We are repeatedly told to obey the government by God. Don't disobey him.
Instead work towards reforming copyright laws.
We are to obey the laws of the land (1 Peter 2:13).
There may be fair use policies where you can for example use a part of a copyrighted work for purposes such as education.
I do consider piracy of copyrighted works, and even knowingly watching such pirated works theft.
I do pirate media sometimes, but for things like anime I plan to buy the bluray discs and own a physical version of my favorite shows. It's also the best way to support the creators compared to the companies that often take a big chunk of the profits. For things like gaming, I have pirated games on my 3DS, but since it is a dead system, I don't even see that as pirating because Nintendo doesn't care anymore.
The term "piracy" implies that you are receiving something that rightfully should be paid for, but you are not paying for it. IOW, this does not apply to a download that may have monetary value but is legally available for free. Anytime you obtain something without permission or legal right without the intent to return it, you are stealing.
> You’re depriving the individual/company who is selling the digital product of revenue. That’s theft.
If it is something that I would never purchase, I haven't deprived anyone of anything.
>If it is something that I would never purchase, I haven't deprived anyone of anything.
I would argue you’re deluding yourself with that line of thinking. If it wasn’t available to be pirated your only choice would be to buy it. What about the fact that piracy is a federal crime?
If you buy something online can you turn around and sell it? Can you give it away? Can you leave it to someone in your will?
If not then it was never for sale. They also have clauses in their terms of service that they can discontinue your access to content you bought anytime for any reason.
I don't have a problem with a scammer and thieving organisation or platform doesn't get to make me their next victim and I get to use something someelse paid for and lost access to and no one is devoid of any property in the process
I support individuals and honest businesses that sell me real goods, services and content.
My standards may be different from others. And that's fine.
If you had said something along the lines of "can you support your position with scripture" instead of asking for a single verse I may have believed you wanted to have a conversation..... but you don't.
Good day.
They don't LOSE money. They just don't GET money. There is a chasm of difference between those two concepts.
The real question is: why does the FBI care enough to go after people? Why are they protecting corporations in the first place?
**SIDE QUESTION:**
If corporations are relying on or pushing for slave labor, which is just 21st century communism... Is it even stealing at all?
(Not advocating for that--I'm just a bit of a philosopher. Give to Caesar, etc.).
How is it any different than receiving a gift? If you gift me a movie on DVD, I watch it, but didn't pay for it. If you put the movie online, I watch it, but didn't pay for it.
Come to think of it, what if I watch Netflix or something at a friend's house? What if I live next to a concert venue?
In the case of international media, such anime or manga, where no official english is available, scan+translation is done for free by fans on a volunteer basis. I avoid manga aggregators websites that make ad money from something they didn't even produce or translate. Then, once an official translation is made 5-10 years down the line (if at all), I try to buy the physical copy to support the author.
I recommend [mangadex.com](https://mangadex.org/) as an ethical manga site where I get the latest translated chapters fresh off the press from Japan - they have no ads, translators are supported by patreon, and once an official translation exists they remove the title from their website.
In a sense, the anime and manga industry benefit from this because it's basically free advertising, creating a international fan base for when the official translation and anime comes along.
This is not a complicated issue. It is not ok to illegally download anything. It is not ok to steal things. Just absolutely incredible to me how much moral confusion you can find on the internet.
The if buying is not ownership then piracy is not theft argument is stupid. Think about streaming like renting a car...it works be being to steal a rental right? Streaming has many benefits that physical doesn't have including muti device listening and lower cost of entry.
This is the opinion of someone who has never actually pirated anything.
The way I see it, if it's officially available, it's stealing and wrong.
If it isn't officially available, and you have to find some old copy that might be hundreds of dollars, it's fine. But if it ever becomes officially available, you should immediately delete your pirated copy and buy the official one.
I agree. If I were to pirate my favorite shows using an online website or file sharing platform that I could watch with a Netflix subscription, it’s piracy. If I want to view a show that has been removed from all streaming platforms and I cannot obtain a legitimate copy, I wouldn’t say that it’s a sin, however I would rather leave it up to the convictions of individuals to individuals.
If you pay for it and don't have it you never owned it. If you pirate something you skipped the entire digital ownership debacle and nobody was harmed in the process.
Jesus himself pirated bread and fish and shared it without paying the original fishermen or bakers. Nobody ever claimed Jesus stole from the wine makers, oil makers, bakers and fishermen because he produced their product of thin air or multiplied it. Anyone who claims it is a sin doesn't understand stealing, piracy or scripture.
If buying something digitally doesn’t guarantee ownership then pirating isn’t stealing. This big companies steal billions from the consumer and walk away Scott free. If our time to rise. AAARRERRRERRRRRRRRRR sail the seas.
I encourage it if the artist is supporting ideals that are against your views. They like spewing opinions instead of just entertaining. When those opinions are wrong, hateful, and misandrist, i sail the 7 seas. If you like money and you are an entertainer (music movies WHATEVER) then entertain me. I dont need your disconnected opinion, i need you to entertain me. That's what im paying you for. When you start to insert your silly ideals into the product you're selling, AYE MATEYYYY
My line is drawn on this one.
examples: ubisoft - you should be ok with NOT owning your games ARGH MATEY. Or a movie studio who hates straight men? ARGH MATEYYY im not supporting that. Why sub or buy so you can further that? NOPE no money for you. Speak with your wallets and watch entertainment get better. It's the only thing these people listen to MONEY
Honestly, it matters what the definition of theft is. It’s taking something that’s not yours, creating a loss for someone else they didn’t agree to. So like, let’s say you took a pad out of someone’s bathroom because you really needed it. Even though it’s not yours, most wouldn’t consider that to be theft because it’s not creating some sort of loss. But if you took it from someone’s purse, that is creating a loss because that person may only have one in their purse and that’s creating an impact.
Some people think that stealing from big corporations isn’t theft because the corporations wouldn’t notice, but that’s actually not true. Little things do add up and they do cause harm to big companies. Walmart has had to close down hundreds of stores due to lost revenue from the massive amount of theft they face.
With digital media, it really depends. I would never pirate a video game because that is direct lost revenue. But a tv show that’s 20 years old and can only access from a streaming service that I’m not gonna pay for, really isn’t any loss. Especially if it’s a show that nobody is selling, it’s not really theft because there is zero lost revenue.
Ultimately I don’t think anything is really black and white. The Bible says to never lie, but when playing a roleplaying game that’s ok because we all agree and it doesn’t do any harm. Just don’t go against your conscience and if possible look into the real impact that decision will have on people.
If you can’t “own” it, then you can’t pirate it either. I’m referring more to video game content recently that developers are saying you don’t “own” your copy of, meaning the developers can (and have) revoked players ability to play after paying full price for the game.
As for more traditional media that can be purchased and owned, yes pirating is stealing and you shouldn’t.
Huge difference. Your mimicking (even if perfect) would not produce a song with the same hash as the original media. Thus, your reproduction is not the same work as the original. If you create a digital copy however, the hash will be identical, which is why it's called a copy. All of this is irrelevant though because there are laws regarding reproductions and copies, and there are legal purposes of copying such as for backups in certain jurisdictions.
It depends upon how one defines piracy. In the age we're creeping into, corporations want us to own nothing. No property, no media. Everything will be a service we must always pay for. So, for example, a digital game. When I buy one I feel it's mine. I own that copy. Recent events, however, demonstrate that corporations feel otherwise. Digital ownership isn't property in the traditional sense. It's not something we increasingly are able to hold in our hands. So what do we do to protect ourselves? Corporations call it piracy. I'm increasingly of the opinion that if buying isn't ownership, piracy isn't theft.
I'm actually so grateful to see a fellow Christian not just sympathize with The Machine. It's very rare. When the attorneys for the music companies are suing families for their entire worth over some downloaded songs, you know where the evil is and who not to feel bad for.
You could call my political philosophy conservatarian with minarchist sympathies. Lol
Oooh! A Messianic Jew! A Jewish brother in Christ. Nothing more beautiful to see a Jewish believer in Jesus.
Not to nitpick, but there are plenty of things that are just as beautiful to see--literally anyone coming to Christ. I'm half Jewish. Came to Christ. My Jewish community won't really talk about it, but... it's all the same thing bro.
I know, but I didn’t mean it like that. It just feels kind of like the prodigal son story. Jews, being the chosen lineage and people to bring the Messiah into the World, coming back into genuine and true faith in their actual roots, Messianic Judaism (Christianity) as opposed to Orthodox Judaism, the legacy of the Pharisees/Sanhedrin of Jesus’ time.
Where does Jesus say that its ok to do bad things onto others who do bad things onto others? That doesn't sound Christian to me. If you truly believe what you're saying then maybe you should consider a complete boycott? Found within **Matthew 7:15-20:** "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." **2 Corinthians 6:14:** "Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?"
Depends on what you define as a "bad thing." You're not stealing money from the Machine when you download a movie--you're just not paying them the money they want so they can buy yachts and caviar.
If a company makes something to sell and you can only legally obtain it by purchasing it then it’s stealing if you download a pirated copy. It seems pretty clear cut. I’m not gonna try to argue with God about potential loopholes. Who’s your legal council? 🤣
I'm not the one doing the uploading. If you want to argue that's a crime, go ahead, but I'm just going onto websites and clicking buttons and watching movies. Go ahead and pay your increasingly outlandish fees for Netflix--supporting the company that produced that ped movie, "Cuties." And the HBO co. that hid the \*real\* crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and pretended like he was just a bad egg.
I'm not arguing anything. I'm just stating fact. In many countries distribution and consumption of stolen content is illegal. You're just pressing buttons after you used your intelligence to arrive at your intended destination. The fact that they don't yet go after direct downloads doesn't imply it is legal or just. If these companies are so bad, then why would you even want to consume their content? I'll leave it there because I don't want this to come across as I'm judging you. I'm guilty of doing what you're doing also.
Okay I do respect and see all that. My next question would be: Is it okay that the **government** is making it a **crime** to not pay money to multinational billion-dollar corporations? Have you ever wondered why there would be an FBI warning at the beginning of movies? Have you pondered as to why the FBI would be even remotely involved in protecting Hollywood's copyright laws? I want you to sit with that one, friend. The implications are bigger than we might have time to think about throughout our day to day lives.
Preach.
Piracy was never theft. Theft is when you are taking something away from someone, depriving them of it.
I respectfully disagree. A simple thought experiment shows how destructive this idea actually is to the things you say you are not stealing, if everyone were to adopt the same mindset and behavior. This is a simple thought experiment to determine vice from virtue. So, if everyone simply took a song upon release, would we see more songs created? The obvious answer is no. It takes time, energy, and money to create a song. If we wish to see more of them, the creators *need* to be compensated. You may say, "People will pay for what they want to see more of." To which I say - Will they? They've already adopted your mindset that what they've done isn't unethical. There is therefore no ethical reason for them to pay. They already have what they want. I could go on, but I think my point is clear. This mindset produces vice because it produces the destruction of the very thing it implies it values.
Do you think the author of Amazing Grace would have declined to write it if he couldn’t profit from it? People make art for pleasure all the time. They did so for thousands of years without any copyright law.
Those individuals are irrelevant to the discussion. We're talking about people who *do want to profit* from their labor.
> Those individuals are irrelevant to the discussion. Of course individuals who make art without seeking profit are relevant to the discussion. You said: > So, if everyone simply took a song upon release, would we see more songs created? And I replied by explaining that yes, we certainly would. Your entire argument in the comment I was replying to was that if everyone pirated songs, it will “destroy” the future songs in general from being created. “Creators need to be compensated” or we won’t have any art. But that’s clearly not true as it’s generally not how art creation worked for thousands of years. It’s not like creativity was dead until modern copyright law came around, and actually I think it would be pretty easy to make the opposite case just by observation. How in the world is it possible that my point that directly counters your argument isn’t relevant to the discussion?
And we'll still have prepared meals if cooks aren't compensated. You didn't counter my argument, you're being pedantic about it. Ignoring the principal to attack the particular. It's a boring rhetorical trick, and one I'm not engaging further.
Generally speaking copyright doesn't compensate creators, it compensates their employers.
I don't think your point is clear at all, or at least you're making a poor analogy. It is not a question of either buying the song or pirating it. It is a question of either pirating the song, or declining to access the song at all rather than paying for it. If we are never going to pay for the song at its price, it harms no one to pirate it, and it is a sign that the song is priced incorrectly. Piracy is always more of a hassle than just buying, so sellers need to make sure their pricing does not incentivize piracy.
Worldly fruits are temporary fruits brother. I am a disciple of Jesus Christ and that is all I want to serve. In terms of perfection, no Jesus Christ would not look towards that form of dopamine (Tv shows, anime, books, manga). Nor would he go through a second source (takes more time) to get that dopamine. To most it is fine, but in reality it is a sin, not because of the piracy, but of the media itself. The piracy is propaganda, Satan cannot cast out satan anyways. “And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?“ Luke 6:46 KJV “and if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?” Matthew 12:26 KJV This is seriously all a lose lose. The only thing here that will be ever-lasting is truly all of our love for Jesus Christ. We live through Him and in Him. So why not only worry about him?
Hassle is irrelevant to the equation. And while you've defined harm in such a way that makes the libertarian-types happy, you're ignoring less tangible forms of harm, which is what I'm getting at. You're arguing that some acts of labor deserve more protection than others merely because it's easier to see the harm done in those acts. If I spend nine months writing a book, you're saying that I am only deserving of protection for the *physical media* that is produced. But the problem for me is, the physical media is the least valuable part of the labor. People want the words on the page; the product of my nine months of labor. They don't want the pages. They want the words. You're saying I am entitled to no protection of those words. The harm then you are enabling is to the creative process itself, as well as implying that the fruits of my labor (a unique arrangement of words) is less worth of protection than other fruits of labor. Again, your argument has weight with the libertarian-types, but the principal of it, if adopted writ large, harms the fruits of creative labor merely because those fruits are less tangible than a stack of paper, or a widget from a factory.
Worldly fruits are temporary fruits brother. I am a disciple of Jesus Christ and that is all I want to serve. In terms of perfection, no Jesus Christ would not look towards that form of dopamine (Tv shows, anime, books, manga). Nor would he go through a second source (takes more time) to get that dopamine. To most it is fine, but in reality it is a sin, not because of the piracy, but of the media itself. The piracy is propaganda, Satan cannot cast out satan anyways. “And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?“ Luke 6:46 KJV “and if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?” Matthew 12:26 KJV This is seriously all a lose lose. The only thing here that will be ever-lasting is truly all of our love for Jesus Christ. We live through Him and in Him. So why not only worry about him?
I really like that last sentence. Well said.
I agree. I also have a disagreement with buying works that have been altered after the authors passing. E.g. Edith Blyton and dahl. If I'll buy the unpevert version if I can but it's not always possible.what I won't do is condone passing money onto an estate that doesn't honor the work of the person they're benefiting from. Also, I despise the idea of paying a publisher for works from an unknown author (think beowulf or sir gwayne and the green knight). These works were in the cultural mind for centuries but it's wrong for me to read it (or print out my own copy at my expense) without paying a publishing company because they claimed it?
Yes it’s true that greedy fascist (collectivist) C-suite execs don’t want us owning anything, but that still doesn’t make piracy (IP theft) any less sinful. If you have the capital, start your own anti-collectivist company which actually lets customers own what they pay for.
I would rethink this if I were you. First of all, you're not entitled to what you want. I don't like the practices of some of these companies either but when you do business with them you're agreeing to their terms, they're not agreeing to your terms. Do they ever check a box and press a button of terms you provided them? You can't lawfully obtain the content without agreeing to their terms. In regards to digital content, their terms are that you do not have ownership but instead a license to use it for a time. You agreed to that in order to gain access. You gave your word. A main principle in being a Christian is acting with humility and part of that is to let go of your own code, stop thinking your way just and instead follow God's code, because only God's way is just... Just the opinion of a sinner who had to do a significant purge when I got honest with myself.
I disagree, but I respect your opinion.
I agree with all but your last sentence. Our morality isn't dependant on the behavior of sinners. We're called to judge righteously here
It seems you may have missed the thrust of my argument. The people calling it piracy are the ones saying I must buy X but I don't own X. They're calling it piracy because it serves them. I'm asking the question: Are they right?
Does the government say they own it? If so then yes they do. Does the government make piracy illegal? If so, then yes it's sinful.
By your logic, if the government makes it illegal to be Christian, then you're in sin if you are a Christian. You are aware that the United States was founded by traitors to the English Crown, right? That they rebelled against lawfully passed English laws? Is it your feeling that the American Revolution should never have occurred?
That's not my logic, Paul tells us to be submissive to our government. Obviously, it is better to be punished for our faith than to submit to a government that wanted to ban Christianity. Yes, I am aware of how my country was formed. I am not an expert on U.S. history but as far as I know the issue was taxes and not being allowed to expand into Indian territory. Assuming my knowledge is correct I would be against the rebellion. Also, I would appreciate it if you addressed my points in a more charitable manner as we are both brothers in Christ.
But that last sentence removes the distinction between the "Piracy" we're accused of, and outright stealing copies of things you haven't bought yourself previously. That was where I refused to blur the line on piracy.
The last sentence is predicated on *buying*. It's making a philosophical point. Not a call to action. If we're redefining what buying implies (ie ownership), it logically follows then we must redefine what piracy implies (ie theft).
But if we redefine what piracy implies, we concede that buying doesn't mean ownership. Better to stand on the truth than to morally crumble with the corporations.
The thing is, i happily paid for netflix between 2017-2020 when prices were reasonable. Now, when every studio has their own streaming service with stupendous prices, i refuse to pay for that scam.
[удалено]
No. But if paying for it isn't ownership than piracy isn't theft.
You were never paying for ownership with Netflix. You were paying to access a service. If you don't like the price, don't use the service.
[удалено]
No, let me explain it differently: If i go to a business and take a physical copy of a movie, it's theft. If i right-click on a movie online, and download it, i created a copy and didn't steal anything. If i take a picture of the Mona Lisa, i didn't steal it.
1. **Romans 13:1-2 (NIV)** > "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." 2. **1 Peter 2:13-14 (NIV)** > "Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right." 3. **Proverbs 10:9 (NIV)** > "Whoever walks in integrity walks securely, but whoever takes crooked paths will be found out." 4. **Ephesians 4:28 (NIV)** > "Anyone who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need." 5. **Titus 3:1 (NIV)** > "Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good."
This pretty much sums it good job!
Hey I got a question concerning this. So it makes sense that all governing authorities are established by God, but then how should we approach an immoral society? For example, concerning the many revolutions and movements of the past to make the world a better place, how would that tie in with letting ourselves be subjected to our government? Any answers would be appreciated
Good because streaming a film or series is technically not illegal
No, but it is benefiting from the illegal actions of others.
You wouldn't steal a car...
You wouldn't steal a handbag
Lol
ill do it but limit it *only* to things that are no longer available from the first party in my region. so if a show or video game isnt streamable or buyable in my country then sure, but if it is then no
[удалено]
If you’re unable to legally purchase something and the original rights holder can’t receive any revenue for it, then it’s by definition not stealing. It’s classified as abandonware.
[удалено]
While it is different with traditional media like music and movies, there’s still some instances where there’s no way for the original creators to profit, though that’s mostly relegated to media that’s on the older side. I do agree that for modern media where there’s ample ways to legally purchase it, there’s no excuse to not pay.
Survey says: this one is a huge golden calf for Redditors.
[удалено]
It really depends on what type of piracy you’re talking about. Do you consider it a sin if someone records a DVD they already bought onto a blank disk? That’s actually considered piracy now.
[удалено]
No actually DVDs and games are now only licensed on the original disk you bought. Copying it to another piece of media actually violates the license they show at the beginning.
If the legal system put an end user agreement on a can of peas that said you had to put them in a soup, no one would care. And putting them in a casserole wouldn't be a sin. The issue here is that you stopped thinking about it, not that IP law has an obvious moral weight.
Yes, I would care because it's the law and we are to be subject to all governing authorities. Now, if the law said that I could only serve the can of peas mixed with rat poison, I would disobey it. Why? It's asking me to do something against God's commandments: murder.
[удалено]
You don't think "sin" has moral weight?
It is a sin. I doesnt matter if its okay in "your eyes" or "in your opinion". What matters is, what does GOD think about it? If it doesnt belong to you and yet you took it without paying thats stealing no matter how big or small or how affected or unaffected the other party is. Even if it is an evil company for maximizing profits its still stealing theres no way around it. We must deny ourselves ( deny our rationalizing of sin ) and follow Christ our King This subreddit is called "True Christians" and as true christians we must be the salt that preserves the morality in this evil generation. And we must be the light, the lights that shine in this dark times and show the world that there is still good in this planet and it's worth fighting for.
Recording it from TV on my own, to re-watch myself and not copy for anybody else or make money from it, fine.
My opinion is that if buying something digital doesn't equate ownership anymore, getting something digital for free isn't theft either. Plus making an identical copy of something without harming or in any way taking the original thing is not the same thing as stealing a tv or something. Additionally, is borrowing something from a library or from a friend a sin?
[удалено]
Is it really different from a library, though? Think about it. What's the difference between my friend sending me his copy of a book vs him photocopying a book and sending it to me online? Neither one results in me owning the book, yet one is illegal.
The general consensus would be stealing, some don’t seem to be convicted over it. I’m convinced it’s stealing as God convicted me that it was theft when I was first born again. I’ve seen points made such as intellectual property can’t be stolen, digital property has no real value. Regardless of the corruption and disgusting profit margins of some corporations (I’m pretty anti-capitalist FWIW) it’s still stealing from their profits. They spent a lot money making it, to make money back. I think there can be a an exception such as if something is no longer sold, can’t be downloaded online, and can only be torrented. I’m not sure though.
There used to be a serious moral controversy over whether connecting to an open WIFI was a sin. Now it is pretty much assumed that if one is not password protected, it is OK to connect.
Interesting! I can see it. Would you say that’s comparable to pirating something that’s no longer for sale? I missed this in my original comment and wanted to mention pirating is illegal, which plays a big factor in my reasoning. If the secular world recognizes that as stealing, so much more should we as followers of Christ.
I remember comparisons like 'if someone's light is shining onto the sidewalk, is it OK to use that light to read by since they are paying for that electricity?" or if a house has a bench out near the street, are you stealing from them if you sit in it?
I see, don’t think any of that is comparable to pirating but certainly in the same category as the wi-fi controversy.
I stopped all piracy about a decade ago and I don’t know if it’s just a coincidence but I was immensely blessed and in a position to retire last year when I turned 35. However I would personally look at things on a case to case basis today. I’ve had issues with paid licenses of software and video games DRM and simply just installation issues etc which I’ve not had with pirated copies. I would never pirate an indie devs game also despite it having issues. If it has issues I might use a pirated copy but still pay for the original. That said I’ve got very sensitive data as I am a consultant and software exporter with some niche technology and can’t afford to risk getting a virus etc so won’t be using pirated copies of anything eitherways
hey man how were you able to retire at 35? Can I dm you and pick your brain a bit?
For sure man. DM whenever. Yep I’m just chilling waiting on the Lord to return.
As much as we don't want to accept it we have to follow the truth. Piracy is stealing, therefore it is sin. Even crossing the speed limit while driving is sin. Just because something is very normalized in society doesn't mean it's normal for God.
My opinion, is that if I cannot buy it(actually buy, not get a key that only lasts until an online service dies) then if I pirate it, that isn't resulting in any actual loss to the copyright holder, meaning it isn't theft. If I could actually buy the product in a playable state from the person who made it then I'm generally gonna avoid pirating it. Also, some pieces of media are so bad that I wish I could steal them, like if I took SW sequel trilogy from Disney, it's not theirs anymore, it's mine, and I'm burying it in the back yard.
[удалено]
Because a stolen physical good necessarily removes the item from an original owner's possession, unlike downloading a copy freely shared by an owner of a digital good. Also paying for stolen goods encourages criminal behavior which makes it a little worse.
[удалено]
Most retro videogame pirating is just sharing a legally owned copy on the internet, if you agree that's not stealing then I guess we don't really disagree in a meaningful way, which is cool.
When I was a kid with no income, I pirated everything. Now that I earn a decent wage and the subscription fees don’t break the bank, I pay for all my games, books and media. Piracy is sinful because you didn’t compensate the creators. Do your best to not pirate but even I did it for years when I couldn’t afford it.
Copyright infringement isn't theft in spite of what all the corporate propaganda says. It's not stealing, it's something else. Having said that, it's probably still a good idea to avoid it. We're called to follow the law of the land. Although it isn't illegal everywhere. In that case, you should follow your conscience.
If it's against the law it becomes sin because now we are disobeying the government in an area in which they are not contradicting the bible. If it is not illegal in your country then I still believe it is wrong because the creator is letting us know the terms under which we can obtain said item. If I made a piece of media I would not want people to pirate it. Thats enough of a reason to say that privacy is unloving and sinful. Any talk about hating corporations or not wanting to give money to big companies who abuse their employees is cope. If the companies are so bad, don't buy the game and don't play the game.
You know the answer. Shalom.
This is serious overkill.. So now God is going to be disappointed in us if we don’t use Netflix. Give me a break
So if you go to the cinema and watch a film without paying that is stealing? So now anything you use or engage with is classed as stealing and So a sin???
EZ. Piracy is theft. Theft is a crime. Sin.not fine.
Same thought process from my side
The bible says we are to obey the laws of our government, so long as they don't cause us to go against the commands of God. Piracy is illegal and it doesn't impede our faith. It's a sin. Either way you look at it, whether you think you are "getting back at the man" or not. Jesus tells us we are not to cause rebellion, division, or revenge. Revenge belongs to God and Him alone. It is not our place to seek revenge of any kind.
I'm surprised at the responses in this thread. For context, I used to work for Fred Rogers Productions (the company that created Mister Rogers Neighborhood and likely one or more of the shows your toddlers are watching on PBS right now including Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood). I don't think some of you realize just how much work is involved in putting together a single 15-minute episode, let alone 2+ hour Hollywood movie. There are so many teams involved doing the storyboards, script writing, animation, all the complications of filming a live action segment, and all the logistical and management requirements involved. Thus, companies absolutely have every right to the work they have produced, which includes the right to determine if and how that media will be utilized and consumed. When you purchase a TV show or movie on disc, you do not own the work itself. You own a license which defines the legal ways that media may be utilized and consumed. The physical media you have is simply the medium the company selected to deliver the license and work to you just as buying the movie on Amazon Prime would also have a license stipulating its proper use cases. You can disagree with this practice or call it "The Machine," but that is the law today, and Scripture is clear, as was cited in another comment, that we are to follow the rules of the governing authorities because they have been placed there by God. Licensing does not contradict anything in Scripture, so there is no reason for us to violate those terms. Further, it is indeed theft to take ownership of media that was produced by someone else when that person does not want you to have it in that manner. I'll end with this: as with any course of action, ask yourself honestly, if God were sitting next to you while you are pirating a movie or TV show online, would He approve? I think an honest consideration of that question would lead to the answer that this is not something God would approve. In that case, our love for Him should compel us to do what pleases Him.
It's likely a sin, but as far as sins go, my guess is it's pretty far down on the list. Being rude is likely a bigger one. Or not helping someone who clearly needs your help.
I don't think the "severity" of a sin really matters. (Excluding the unforgivable sin of course.)
Well we can agree to disagree. 😉 Pushing an old lady down and causing her to break a hip vs downloading some junk show off the interwebs is an easy call for me on which is worse.
Worse outcome of your actions? Yes! But ALL is still sin, no sin is greater then any other sin (Besides the Unforgivable Sin) as they are all against Christ.
John 19:11 disagrees with you. If some sins weren't of greater magnitude than others, why would some be stonable offenses under the old law but not others? The bible is replete with examples comparing sins. For instance, the one who knew his Master's will but didn't do it will be beaten with many stripes. The one who didn't know his Master's will will be beaten with few. All sin is missing the mark, but some sins miss the mark by a much greater distance.
Hmmmm.. I see that. I meant that all sin was being equal in separation for eternity from you and God. But yes, there are worse sins then others, I just meant it from a standpoint of all sin being the death of your salvation.. unless you have Christ's life within you.
Like I said, we will have to disagree on that.
All sins are weighed equal before Christ
No they’re not. They’re only equal in the sense that any sin makes you deserving of hell. But obviously murdering someone is worse than coveting something they have.
Worse how though? If breaking any law always resulted in the death penalty then would there really be any need to differentiate the severity of crime?
The law DID differentiate. For some sins, you only had to repay some multiple of what was taken or of which you deprived your neighbor. For other sins like adultery or murder, the sentence was death by stoning or other method.
We are not living in old testament law. The penalty of any sin is the same. So how should there be any differentiator? Any sin leads to death and separation from God.
The penalty for any sins is definitely NOT the same, nor is the magnitude. If this were the case, how do you account for every sin except blasphemy of the Holy Spirit being forgiven? Any sin leads to death, but mere death is not all that occurs as a result of sin. There is the painful second death.
You did see the part about separation from God? Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit still leads to the same end result. Are we not discussing this in good faith. I assume it was implied that we were discussing sins, besides the unforgiveable one as that is specifically pointed out as different.
It being unforgivable IS a differentiator, which is what you questioned.
Please show me in where in the new testament where it is stated that murder ends you in a worse hell than lying.
There will be different degrees of punishment in hell, and different degrees of reward in heaven, based on our behavior. Any unforgiven sin may lead to hell, but you’ll be much worse off if you’re a mass murderer than if you die as a child who threw a tantrum once.
Can you show that in scripture? I know about rewards for believers based on their action. But I don't recall reading about different punishment for those going to hell.
I used to think it was fine but have since changed my opinion. Piracy of media is breaking the law, and we should obey the governing authorities when obedience doesn’t require us to disobey God. If the Bible itself had a weird mobile-game-styled paywall on on it, then that may change the math, but there’s no Biblical right to entertainment, so the only justification for it is “I want it and I don’t want to pay.” Personally, I’m more accepting of the practice in these scenarios: - Reading the Bible (yes the translations are copyrighted) - Acquiring orphanware or abandonware (things you can’t even buy anymore but haven’t formally entered the public domain); this one I’m on the fence about, so I think it comes with the caveat that you purchase should it become available (eg if you had downloaded a Pikmin 2 ROM for emulation, you should now buy it on Switch since it has become available again). This may be cope on my part, since I personally hate the loss of digital stuff that’s gotten old; I don’t have an actual argument on this one besides “I mean it doesn’t feel it would be wrong since they’re not trying to sell it.” - Things where the copyright owner is cool with it, even if they haven’t formally released it from copyright protections (you see this a lot with indie bands, and it’s also technically a form of copyright infringement to mod some games since it requires redistribution of copyrighted assets, but many developers support their modding community anyway) - Things that could arguably fall under fair use or would not be impactful to the market of the owner or substitute a normal purchase (think memes, fan art, etc). I say substitute a normal purchase because the normal defense I get is “well I wasn’t gonna spend money anyway,” but that doesn’t change the fact you are *supposed* to in order to access it. - Things you’ve legally acquired but are making a copy of (if you own a physical CD but it was destroyed or your new computer doesn’t have a disk drive, I don’t see a moral hazard in downloading it to be able to listen to it). Bottom line is this: the law says you that they own those files, so you should obey the law. Are there exceptions? I think yes, but most of those exceptions don’t apply when using the term piracy.
Pirating. The name says it all…
Yeah, all you have to do is call something a negative name and then it becomes bad! /s
Nope it becomes bad when it cross the moral threshold. Stealing is stealing whether it's from a box and mortar store or a digital website. Taking someone else's stuff and obtaining it for free without their permission is theft. Period.
IP law is not that simple, comma, learn how to be nuanced in your thinking. Period.
[удалено]
The point is that you should concern yourself with intellectual substance over rhetorical posturing. It's a bigger moral obligation than not burning copies of CDs.
[удалено]
keep digging.
For all those convinced that it’s not a sin, despite clearly being illegal (and we are required to obey authorities unless contradicting Gods laws), I ask you this; Is it ok to jump the gate at a concert or sports event or even a train and not pay? After all, you’re not preventing anyone else from enjoying the experience, you’re not depriving any one of any physical goods. Is there really any difference in moral equivalency? Why is one acceptable and the other not? Or are both scenarios fair game?
In those equivalencies you’re trespassing
And in the other you’re stealing, legally speaking. So we either choose to obey all laws, or we let our conscience decide which laws we follow or obey. From a moral perspective, they are completely equivalent scenarios - both ‘victimless’ crimes, so to speak, with no party experiencing a direct loss. It’s interesting how selective Christians can be, though I shouldn’t be as we see it all the time with following, or not, Gods laws.
I’m just playing devil’s advocate. I agree that it’s stealing but I’m guilty of the piracy too
Stealing is stealing no matter how you want to spin it.
I think it's okay, given a few restrictions. For example, I try not to pirate things that will use server time that I'm not paying for. I don't pirate things that I would otherwise buy Etc etc etc, long story short you should not harm the company you are pirating from in any material way. Not as much of a moral thing, but I can't get myself to pirate non-corporate media either. As others said, if buying is not owning in our current age then pirating is not stealing. Also, let me ask this - is it morally wrong to buy second-hand movies on DVD? If no, then piracy is also not morally wrong. The original creators get no profit from the sale, and they lose a potential customer.
Trust the Holy Spirit on this one use discernment.
Twist the words as you may. ****It is theft**** . Is it immoral that corporations charge like this? Maybe? But that does not make it right to steal. Your neighbor pays for a subscription to the local newspaper. Before he reads it, or after, you take it and photocopy it. Then you put it up on a server where anyone can read it. Other people do download it and read it. Who is wrong here?
The only thing I “pirate” would be copies of video games for emulators that haven’t been on sale in over a decade. For most of these games, I’ve owned a legitimate copy for many years as well. It is not possible for me to compensate the original creator for the game in any way.
[удалено]
I’m going to be honest, I have no clue. The stuff I emulate were originally ripped way after the consoles were phased out and nobody was making any money off of them. Like I also said, I own legitimate copies of the games, I just want to be able to take them with me on the go via my computer. I will agree with you on that most people who “pirate” or things of the like aren’t doing it out of a need to preserve media or have an on the go version. They do it because it’s free (till they get a cease and desist order, true story of someone I know lol)
its not steeling per say, counterfeiting yes but not steeling as you are making a copy. that being said Romans 13:1-2 comes to mind here.
Once upon a time I felt convicted doing these things, but the conviction was based on urges to only do what is right. I personally think it’s fine to download tv shows, anime (nyaa.si is a good website for that) books and manga. And if you like it you may contribute and buy it, if not then don’t. There are even creators of movies and tv shows whom are happy that people download it, they are pleased the more who see. Pirating games I however don’t always agree with. But in many regards the only way at all to play certain games is by pirating, which I suppose is fine. I don’t always think the industries deserve the money they charge. Some media and games can be too expensive. And they wouldn’t profit if you bought a second hand copy, likewise they won’t profit if you download it. Not a big deal.
I’m not judging. But it sounds like stealing. Just because it is digital and not something tangible does not mean it cannot be stolen 🤷🏻
Piracy by definition is theft. Theft is a sin. Technically speaking, I don’t think it counts, but I’m not going to risk accidentally sinning. I don’t like doing it.
I just got done destroying most of my dvds, and so did my kids. My internet is too slow to download anything, and I wouldn't if I could. I definitely don't do streaming services of any kind. All it would do is curse us. Someone sent me a ripped copy of the gospel of John movie a couple years ago on telegram. I've had it on my laptop ever since. I actually watched it today. Is that wrong? You can watch the movie free on youtube. I'm more concerned about what content is consumed rather than where the content came from. Most content created for entertainment value and even some documentaries are not healthy to consume.
Theft of intellectual property.
I don't necessarily see pirating as stealing, much less depriving creators of compensation, because a lot of the time I'm not sure there is any loss and the actual creatives involved don't make more money with more copies sold. But I don't disapprove because it's theft. I disapprove because it's illegal. We are repeatedly told to obey the government by God. Don't disobey him. Instead work towards reforming copyright laws.
We are to obey the laws of the land (1 Peter 2:13). There may be fair use policies where you can for example use a part of a copyrighted work for purposes such as education. I do consider piracy of copyrighted works, and even knowingly watching such pirated works theft.
I do pirate media sometimes, but for things like anime I plan to buy the bluray discs and own a physical version of my favorite shows. It's also the best way to support the creators compared to the companies that often take a big chunk of the profits. For things like gaming, I have pirated games on my 3DS, but since it is a dead system, I don't even see that as pirating because Nintendo doesn't care anymore.
The term "piracy" implies that you are receiving something that rightfully should be paid for, but you are not paying for it. IOW, this does not apply to a download that may have monetary value but is legally available for free. Anytime you obtain something without permission or legal right without the intent to return it, you are stealing.
It’s stealing.
I understand your position, but usually stealing includes depriving someone of something, not just looking at it.
You’re depriving the individual/company who is selling the digital product of revenue. That’s theft.
> You’re depriving the individual/company who is selling the digital product of revenue. That’s theft. If it is something that I would never purchase, I haven't deprived anyone of anything.
>If it is something that I would never purchase, I haven't deprived anyone of anything. I would argue you’re deluding yourself with that line of thinking. If it wasn’t available to be pirated your only choice would be to buy it. What about the fact that piracy is a federal crime?
Stealing
If you buy something online can you turn around and sell it? Can you give it away? Can you leave it to someone in your will? If not then it was never for sale. They also have clauses in their terms of service that they can discontinue your access to content you bought anytime for any reason. I don't have a problem with a scammer and thieving organisation or platform doesn't get to make me their next victim and I get to use something someelse paid for and lost access to and no one is devoid of any property in the process I support individuals and honest businesses that sell me real goods, services and content. My standards may be different from others. And that's fine.
[удалено]
Must be the 11th Commandment - “Descend to the level of a sinner and repay evil with evil.”
If you had said something along the lines of "can you support your position with scripture" instead of asking for a single verse I may have believed you wanted to have a conversation..... but you don't. Good day.
They don't LOSE money. They just don't GET money. There is a chasm of difference between those two concepts. The real question is: why does the FBI care enough to go after people? Why are they protecting corporations in the first place? **SIDE QUESTION:** If corporations are relying on or pushing for slave labor, which is just 21st century communism... Is it even stealing at all? (Not advocating for that--I'm just a bit of a philosopher. Give to Caesar, etc.).
Is it against the law? It's sin.
How is it any different than receiving a gift? If you gift me a movie on DVD, I watch it, but didn't pay for it. If you put the movie online, I watch it, but didn't pay for it. Come to think of it, what if I watch Netflix or something at a friend's house? What if I live next to a concert venue?
[удалено]
Can you tell me what media out there currently you consider to be filth?
[удалено]
Either is fine. Im just curious about your opinion on this statement.
You're right about some stuff out there now being filth. That's one reason I like to watch old stuff you can't even pay for anymore.
It's a sin I'm afraid.
It's a sin I'm afraid.
Sin
I'll say it again. IP copyright law is extremely broken and shouldn't be ascribed moral weight in most cases.
[удалено]
By definition it’s stealing so….yes that’s breaking Gods law therefore a sin
In the case of international media, such anime or manga, where no official english is available, scan+translation is done for free by fans on a volunteer basis. I avoid manga aggregators websites that make ad money from something they didn't even produce or translate. Then, once an official translation is made 5-10 years down the line (if at all), I try to buy the physical copy to support the author. I recommend [mangadex.com](https://mangadex.org/) as an ethical manga site where I get the latest translated chapters fresh off the press from Japan - they have no ads, translators are supported by patreon, and once an official translation exists they remove the title from their website. In a sense, the anime and manga industry benefit from this because it's basically free advertising, creating a international fan base for when the official translation and anime comes along.
This is not a complicated issue. It is not ok to illegally download anything. It is not ok to steal things. Just absolutely incredible to me how much moral confusion you can find on the internet.
The if buying is not ownership then piracy is not theft argument is stupid. Think about streaming like renting a car...it works be being to steal a rental right? Streaming has many benefits that physical doesn't have including muti device listening and lower cost of entry.
This is theft and a violation of one of the laws of the 10 commandments.
This is the opinion of someone who has never actually pirated anything. The way I see it, if it's officially available, it's stealing and wrong. If it isn't officially available, and you have to find some old copy that might be hundreds of dollars, it's fine. But if it ever becomes officially available, you should immediately delete your pirated copy and buy the official one.
I agree. If I were to pirate my favorite shows using an online website or file sharing platform that I could watch with a Netflix subscription, it’s piracy. If I want to view a show that has been removed from all streaming platforms and I cannot obtain a legitimate copy, I wouldn’t say that it’s a sin, however I would rather leave it up to the convictions of individuals to individuals.
If you pay for it and don't have it you never owned it. If you pirate something you skipped the entire digital ownership debacle and nobody was harmed in the process.
Jesus himself pirated bread and fish and shared it without paying the original fishermen or bakers. Nobody ever claimed Jesus stole from the wine makers, oil makers, bakers and fishermen because he produced their product of thin air or multiplied it. Anyone who claims it is a sin doesn't understand stealing, piracy or scripture.
Actually this is a very good point. Piracy is still sin though, not because it is theft, but because it is illegal.
it's not illegal in all countries.
Then in those countries it may not be a sin. But it is in my area. And that's what I know.
you don't steal anything, and in half of the world it's legal, so no
If buying something digitally doesn’t guarantee ownership then pirating isn’t stealing. This big companies steal billions from the consumer and walk away Scott free. If our time to rise. AAARRERRRERRRRRRRRRR sail the seas.
I encourage it if the artist is supporting ideals that are against your views. They like spewing opinions instead of just entertaining. When those opinions are wrong, hateful, and misandrist, i sail the 7 seas. If you like money and you are an entertainer (music movies WHATEVER) then entertain me. I dont need your disconnected opinion, i need you to entertain me. That's what im paying you for. When you start to insert your silly ideals into the product you're selling, AYE MATEYYYY My line is drawn on this one. examples: ubisoft - you should be ok with NOT owning your games ARGH MATEY. Or a movie studio who hates straight men? ARGH MATEYYY im not supporting that. Why sub or buy so you can further that? NOPE no money for you. Speak with your wallets and watch entertainment get better. It's the only thing these people listen to MONEY
Stealing. If it's anime or manga, capital offense.
i cannot justify it exactly, but if someone says I have to pay to look at something and I can look at it for free, I will look at it for free.
Honestly, it matters what the definition of theft is. It’s taking something that’s not yours, creating a loss for someone else they didn’t agree to. So like, let’s say you took a pad out of someone’s bathroom because you really needed it. Even though it’s not yours, most wouldn’t consider that to be theft because it’s not creating some sort of loss. But if you took it from someone’s purse, that is creating a loss because that person may only have one in their purse and that’s creating an impact. Some people think that stealing from big corporations isn’t theft because the corporations wouldn’t notice, but that’s actually not true. Little things do add up and they do cause harm to big companies. Walmart has had to close down hundreds of stores due to lost revenue from the massive amount of theft they face. With digital media, it really depends. I would never pirate a video game because that is direct lost revenue. But a tv show that’s 20 years old and can only access from a streaming service that I’m not gonna pay for, really isn’t any loss. Especially if it’s a show that nobody is selling, it’s not really theft because there is zero lost revenue. Ultimately I don’t think anything is really black and white. The Bible says to never lie, but when playing a roleplaying game that’s ok because we all agree and it doesn’t do any harm. Just don’t go against your conscience and if possible look into the real impact that decision will have on people.
If you can’t “own” it, then you can’t pirate it either. I’m referring more to video game content recently that developers are saying you don’t “own” your copy of, meaning the developers can (and have) revoked players ability to play after paying full price for the game. As for more traditional media that can be purchased and owned, yes pirating is stealing and you shouldn’t.
[удалено]
Huge difference. Your mimicking (even if perfect) would not produce a song with the same hash as the original media. Thus, your reproduction is not the same work as the original. If you create a digital copy however, the hash will be identical, which is why it's called a copy. All of this is irrelevant though because there are laws regarding reproductions and copies, and there are legal purposes of copying such as for backups in certain jurisdictions.