Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
rhinoceroshorn
Posts: 1177
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 7:27 pm

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by rhinoceroshorn »

Sam Vara wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:49 pm The most wholesome desire of that nature leads to the purchase of books and distribution to those who can't afford them.
This is unpractical. If you just put books on library Genesis, who wants them, downloads them.
Demanding the producers receive no payment for their labour looks like a good way of ensuring that nothing of that nature will be produced.
Speculation. It's just a matter of finding an alternative way to earn from such kinds of work. A good example of this is YouTube. Musicians put their stuff there and gain with advertisements.
Eyes downcast, not footloose,
senses guarded, with protected mind,
not oozing — not burning — with lust,
wander alone
like a rhinoceros.
Sutta Nipāta 1.3 - Khaggavisana Sutta
Image
See, Ānanda! All those conditioned phenomena have passed, ceased, and perished. So impermanent are conditions, so unstable are conditions, so unreliable are conditions. This is quite enough for you to become disillusioned, dispassionate, and freed regarding all conditions.
Dīgha Nikāya 17
User avatar
rhinoceroshorn
Posts: 1177
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 7:27 pm

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by rhinoceroshorn »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:56 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:49 pm
rhinoceroshorn wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:29 pm
Wholesome desire for the welfare of human beings who can't afford books.
The most wholesome desire of that nature leads to the purchase of books and distribution to those who can't afford them.

Demanding the producers receive no payment for their labour looks like a good way of ensuring that nothing of that nature will be produced.
Exactly. The same argument was used against Corbyn’s insane idea of price controls on drugs and limiting the pharmaceutical companies patents.
Non-sequitur since all my posts are anti-state not pro-state like Corbin's idea.
Eyes downcast, not footloose,
senses guarded, with protected mind,
not oozing — not burning — with lust,
wander alone
like a rhinoceros.
Sutta Nipāta 1.3 - Khaggavisana Sutta
Image
See, Ānanda! All those conditioned phenomena have passed, ceased, and perished. So impermanent are conditions, so unstable are conditions, so unreliable are conditions. This is quite enough for you to become disillusioned, dispassionate, and freed regarding all conditions.
Dīgha Nikāya 17
User avatar
rhinoceroshorn
Posts: 1177
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 7:27 pm

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by rhinoceroshorn »

DaniloSS wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:53 pm
rhinoceroshorn wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:29 pm Wholesome desire for the welfare of human beings who can't afford books.
A possible wholesome purpose does not justify the unwholesome means.
Abandoning anything that is unwholesome is the top priority in the Buddha's teachings.

Justice vs. Skillfulness
Wisdom over Justice
It's not an unwholesome mean, though.
Nothing is taken since it's multiplied. It's given since who copied provided it for free.
Eyes downcast, not footloose,
senses guarded, with protected mind,
not oozing — not burning — with lust,
wander alone
like a rhinoceros.
Sutta Nipāta 1.3 - Khaggavisana Sutta
Image
See, Ānanda! All those conditioned phenomena have passed, ceased, and perished. So impermanent are conditions, so unstable are conditions, so unreliable are conditions. This is quite enough for you to become disillusioned, dispassionate, and freed regarding all conditions.
Dīgha Nikāya 17
DaniloSS
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 10:33 pm

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by DaniloSS »

rhinoceroshorn wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 4:01 pm It's not an unwholesome mean, though.
Nothing is taken since it's multiplied. It's given since who copied provided it for free.
It's surely unwholesome
The one whom copied is not the owner.
Copying and distributing undermines the profits of the owner, hence causing prejudice to him.
In other words, piracy subtracts the potential of his profits.

“Abandoning the taking of what is not given, he abstains from taking what is not given. He takes only what is given, accepts only what is given, lives not by stealth but by means of a self that has become pure." (AN 10:99)
User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 9216
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by Sam Vara »

rhinoceroshorn wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:57 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:49 pm The most wholesome desire of that nature leads to the purchase of books and distribution to those who can't afford them.
This is unpractical. If you just put books on library Genesis, who wants them, downloads them.
Sure, and if they were books produced by you, there would be no problem with that. The problem with illegal downloading is that you don't have the permission of the author, who therefore loses income that they may have depended on.
Speculation
No, basic economic theory from Adam Smith onwards. You might know better, of course.
It's just a matter of finding an alternative way to earn from such kinds of work. A good example of this is YouTube. Musicians put their stuff there and gain with advertisements.
If they want to earn that way, all well and good. But illegal downloading violates a prior agreement, just as refusing to pay a shopkeeper for goods you have taken. They could just sell more stuff, or find an alternative way of recouping outlay already made.
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by Kim OHara »

rhinoceroshorn wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 11:13 am
Kim OHara wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 10:50 am It could even be argued that we, as borrowers, do pay authors when we borrow their books, since libraries are supported by the taxes we pay.
What about the internet bill?
I don't what you mean by "internet bill".
We all pay to use the internet, but that money goes to our ISP's, not the content creators.
We all (sometimes, at least) pay to download content, and royalties from those payments should go to content creators. The rates paid by iTunes, Kindle, etc, are appallingly low but at least the authors have agreed to release their material in this way and are getting *something* for it.

:reading:
Kim
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by chownah »

Sam Vara wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 4:42 pm The problem with illegal downloading is that you don't have the permission of the author,
Borrowing a book from a friend is done without the author's permission.
Listening to a song at an informal party is done without the author's permission.
Playing a song on a guitar in the privacy of your own home is done without the author's permission.
Copying what I post into your post is done without the author's permission.
chownah
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by chownah »

Sam Vara wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:49 pm
The most wholesome desire of that nature leads to the purchase of books and distribution to those who can't afford them.
The most wholesome desire of that nature leads to the providing of books on line free for download without concern for what negative consequences this might have for the provider.
It is called "selfless action".
chownah
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by chownah »

People,
If you think that downloading something from the internet is stealing then by all means DO NOT DO IT.....because if you do then you will be intentionally stealing. On the other hand if you don't think that downloading something form the internet is stealilng then if you do it you will not be intentionally stealing....isn't this what the buddha taught?
chownah
People,
Don't try to force your moralistic views on me. I will consider for my self if I think that downloading something from the internet is stealing....or immoral in some other way. I support people having the chance to explain on line how downloading something from the internet can be considered stealing....and I support people having the chance to explain on line how downloading something is not stealing.....and I support letting each individual decide for themselves what is what in this regard.....
chownah
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 5332
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by confusedlayman »

chownah wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 4:41 am People,
If you think that downloading something from the internet is stealing then by all means DO NOT DO IT.....because if you do then you will be intentionally stealing. On the other hand if you don't think that downloading something form the internet is stealilng then if you do it you will not be intentionally stealing....isn't this what the buddha taught?
chownah
People,
Don't try to force your moralistic views on me. I will consider for my self if I think that downloading something from the internet is stealing....or immoral in some other way. I support people having the chance to explain on line how downloading something from the internet can be considered stealing....and I support people having the chance to explain on line how downloading something is not stealing.....and I support letting each individual decide for themselves what is what in this regard.....
chownah
but we buddhist should see fault in slightest thing also
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by chownah »

confusedlayman wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 7:53 am
chownah wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 4:41 am People,
If you think that downloading something from the internet is stealing then by all means DO NOT DO IT.....because if you do then you will be intentionally stealing. On the other hand if you don't think that downloading something form the internet is stealilng then if you do it you will not be intentionally stealing....isn't this what the buddha taught?
chownah
People,
Don't try to force your moralistic views on me. I will consider for my self if I think that downloading something from the internet is stealing....or immoral in some other way. I support people having the chance to explain on line how downloading something from the internet can be considered stealing....and I support people having the chance to explain on line how downloading something is not stealing.....and I support letting each individual decide for themselves what is what in this regard.....
chownah
but we buddhist should see fault in slightest thing also
I think that the buddha taught people to see clearly their own intentions....I don't think the buddha talked about finding fault especially I don't think the buddha talked about finding fault with other people....
chownah
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by chownah »

By and large, intellectual property laws are about owning ideas.

A company can own a patent to certain kinds of DNA. Could be that the law says that you don't own your own dna because some company has patented it.

A company made a gmo (genetically modified organism....where some living thing's dna is intentionally altered and the resulting organism is owned by the company that created it). The company grew some gmo wheat and the spores from that wheat blew to another farmer's field so his wheat crop then contained the gmo dna. The company sued the farmer for growing their gmo crop without paying them.

chownah
bodhifollower
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:37 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by bodhifollower »

"Taking that which is not given". So if you're taking information which is not given to you, nor was intended to be for you, nor was it freely offered to you, and you're asking if this break the second moral virtue of taking that which is not given. Man I don't know what to tell you. If you can't figure that out then I don't think you should be using the internet at all, let alone making posts asking people the answer.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by chownah »

The things found on the internet are freely given unless there is a fee that must be paid to view or download.....if someone stole a song (for instance) and put it on the internet and freely gives it away then if someone objects to this maybe the party that objects to this should go find the person who "stole" it.....it is not my job to verify the legal status of the stuff that is freely given on the internet....
chownah
User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 9216
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: There is no difference between reading a book at a library and downloading it online

Post by Sam Vara »

chownah wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 4:31 am
Sam Vara wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 4:42 pm The problem with illegal downloading is that you don't have the permission of the author,
Borrowing a book from a friend is done without the author's permission.
Listening to a song at an informal party is done without the author's permission.
Playing a song on a guitar in the privacy of your own home is done without the author's permission.
Copying what I post into your post is done without the author's permission.
chownah
If you borrow a book from a friend without the author's permission, then the author has presumably already sold the rights of the book in exchange for a share of the purchase price. If there is illegal downloading, then the author is still in expectation of a share of the price of reading it - which s/he has now been cheated out of. The same applies to listening to a song or playing it yourself if you have the requisite musical skill. In each case, the author entered into a publishing agreement which specified what should not be done with the music (i.e. the "rights" over the creation) and this, for obvious reasons, does not include playing the music at a private party or recreating it as best one can.

There is an interesting example of this in the story of how the Catholic Church attempted to keep performances of Allegri's Miserere restricted to the Sistine Chapel, in order to preserve the mystique of this piece. Transcriptions from a limited number of scores was forbidden. A mass at the chapel was attended by the 14 year old Mozart, who was able to transcribe the pice from memory.

It would be perfectly OK, both in ethical or legal terms, for me to loan a book that had been given to me by a friend. But not if the prior gift or loan had been made subject to legal provisions, such as applies to loans to museums and galleries. Nor would it be ethical for me to disclose the contents of a book if the author had asked me not to do so as a condition of the loan. I shouldn't borrow anything from a friend if I believe that the loan or gift or sale to him/her was subject to that kind of restriction.
Post Reply