Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Mr Man »

DaniloSS wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:12 pm
Mr Man wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 8:56 pm Do you think there is a moral basis for the concept of intellectual property?
Right View (samma ditthi) is the worldview by which the Lord Buddha's followers base their actions and the view that "there is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed" is included in it. So, under Right View, whatever service or product (tangible or not) which is the fruit of someone else's effort, time and skill is to be regarded as their property. To say the opposite is wrong speech born from wrong view.
You haven't answered the question DaniloSS.

And this
whatever service or product (tangible or not) which is the fruit of someone else's effort, time and skill is to be regarded as their property
Is not from the Buddha's teaching, as far as I know.
DaniloSS
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 10:33 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by DaniloSS »

Mr Man wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:51 pm You haven't answered the question DaniloSS.
The topic is about illegal downloading under the lens of the Buddha-Dhamma (a issue that I already answered)
Anything aside of that is off-topic.
Mr Man wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:51 pm Is not from the Buddha's teaching, as far as I know.
I don't know how much you are acquainted with the suttas.
But it's in all over the Pali Cannon:
ANYTHING that leads to the increase of geed/passion is Adhamma
ANYTHING that leads to the decrease of geed/passion is in line with the Dhamma

It's in the standard formulation of what is Right View.

He does not covet the belongings of others, thinking, ‘O, that what belongs to others would be mine!’ He bears no ill will and is not corrupt in the resolves of his heart. (He thinks,) ‘May these beings be free from animosity, free from oppression, free from trouble, and may they look after themselves with ease!’ He has right view and is not warped in the way he sees things: ‘There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.’ This is how one is made pure in three ways by mental action. (https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN10_165.html)

Why do you think that all the precepts are abstentions from actions born from greed?

It's there: do not take what is not given

“And what, monks, is right resolve? Resolve for renunciation, resolve for non-ill will, resolve for harmlessness: This, monks, is called right resolve. (https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN45_8.html)

Take a look at the categorical classification of what is in line with the Dhamma and what is not: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN8_53.html

What's more to be said? Are you expecting that the suttas make use of the term "intellectual property" with all its letters to address the issue?
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Mr Man »

DaniloSS wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 5:11 pm
Mr Man wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:51 pm You haven't answered the question DaniloSS.
The topic is about illegal downloading under the lens of the Buddha-Dhamma (a issue that I already answered)
Anything aside of that is off-topic.
So you don't want to answer the question I put to you? Fair enough.
DaniloSS wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 5:11 pm
Mr Man wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:51 pm Is not from the Buddha's teaching, as far as I know.
I don't know how much you are acquainted with the suttas.
But it's in all over the Pali Cannon:
This is what is not from the "Pali Cannon" -
DaniloSS wrote:whatever service or product (tangible or not) which is the fruit of someone else's effort, time and skill is to be regarded as their property
DaniloSS
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 10:33 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by DaniloSS »

Mr Man wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 5:22 pm This is what is not from the "Pali Cannon" -
Of course, it's not formulated with the same words, but the principle it's surely there. Words are conventions. The same thing can be conveyed using different words.
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Mr Man »

DaniloSS wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 5:35 pm
Of course, it's not formulated with the same words, but the principle it's surely there. Words are conventions. The same thing can be conveyed using different words.
I don't believe the principle of non-tangible property rights (intellectual property rights) is there (in the Pali Canon). I believe that this concept is alien to the Buddha's teachings.

For the record this doesn't mean I think that the law should be broken or that illegal downloading is appropriate I am just not sure if it constitutes theft.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by mjaviem »

If someone is starving and a food thief offers him stolen food, should he accept the offer or should he abstain from it?
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Sam Vara »

mjaviem wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:18 pm If someone is starving and a food thief offers him stolen food, should he accept the offer or should he abstain from it?
Personally, I would accept it. Maintaining life is important. I would do the same regarding an illegal download, if one were to save life rather than (as is usually the case) offer mere entertainment.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Sam Vara »

Mr Man wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:00 pm
DaniloSS wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 5:35 pm
Of course, it's not formulated with the same words, but the principle it's surely there. Words are conventions. The same thing can be conveyed using different words.
I don't believe the principle of non-tangible property rights (intellectual property rights) is there (in the Pali Canon). I believe that this concept is alien to the Buddha's teachings.

For the record this doesn't mean I think that the law should be broken or that illegal downloading is appropriate I am just not sure if it constitutes theft.
I'm not disagreeing with you one bit, but would this extend to having no scruples about internet theft of money from a bank or other large corporation? All it involves is the non-tangible alteration of one's bank balance in ways that cannot be challenged by them or a third party.

Just offering an antithesis in the dialectical chasing down of this intriguing topic! :anjali:
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by mjaviem »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 7:08 pm Personally, I would accept it. Maintaining life is important. I would do the same regarding an illegal download, if one were to save life rather than (as is usually the case) offer mere entertainment.
So it looks that what is wrong is stealing and also indulging in sensual pleasures. Accepting an stolen good knowingly... is debatable. Like I expressed before, the DRM cracker is the slaughterer but eating the meat (without participating on the slaughter in any way) is a matter of debate the way I see it.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Mr Man »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 7:13 pm
Mr Man wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 6:00 pm
DaniloSS wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 5:35 pm
Of course, it's not formulated with the same words, but the principle it's surely there. Words are conventions. The same thing can be conveyed using different words.
I don't believe the principle of non-tangible property rights (intellectual property rights) is there (in the Pali Canon). I believe that this concept is alien to the Buddha's teachings.

For the record this doesn't mean I think that the law should be broken or that illegal downloading is appropriate I am just not sure if it constitutes theft.
I'm not disagreeing with you one bit, but would this extend to having no scruples about internet theft of money from a bank or other large corporation? All it involves is the non-tangible alteration of one's bank balance in ways that cannot be challenged by them or a third party.

Just offering an antithesis in the dialectical chasing down of this intriguing topic! :anjali:
Hi Sam Vara
One difference with internet theft of money would be that you will be causing an actual decrease in what the other party already has. With software piracy you are possibly depriving the other party of potential revenue.

& best wishes for the year ahead.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Sam Vara »

Mr Man wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 7:55 pm One difference with internet theft of money would be that you will be causing an actual decrease in what the other party already has. With software piracy you are possibly depriving the other party of potential revenue.
Yes, that's the point I was getting at. With internet fraud, the situation is even stranger, in that there doesn't even need to be another party who is deprived. Scams which simply increase the amount of money in an account, for example; all you need to do is to convince the bank that there is more money there, and you have in effect created it ab nihilo. The worst you have done to anyone else is to possibly increase the rate of inflation by a miniscule amount. That's why, I think, such discussions involve people trying to get at the rationale behind the second precept. Is theft proscribed because it harms another? Because it often involves dishonesty? Or because it increases one's own greed?
& best wishes for the year ahead.
Thanks, and to you and yours, Mr Man. Let's hope it is better than 2020! :anjali: :heart:
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by cappuccino »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:36 pm Is theft proscribed because it harms another? Because it often involves dishonesty? Or because it increases one's own greed?
Stealing — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from stealing is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to the loss of one's wealth.

Vipaka Sutta
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Sam Vara »

cappuccino wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:48 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:36 pm Is theft proscribed because it harms another? Because it often involves dishonesty? Or because it increases one's own greed?
Stealing — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from stealing is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to the loss of one's wealth.

Vipaka Sutta
Yes, thanks for the reminder, cappuccino. I guess the problem is in actually defining stealing and applying it to situations the Buddha could have had no knowledge of (or, of course, was aware of due to his omniscience, but didn't speak about) because they were in the future. In the case of some forms of software piracy, and some forms of fraud, all that is being done is the multiplication of units which someone else is attempting to restrict.

And, before the pro-piracy contingent claim another convert, all the second precept seems to do is to proscribe the movement of units of value from one place to another.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by cappuccino »

Sam Vara wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:56 pm I guess the problem is in actually defining stealing
taking what is not given
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Sam Vara »

cappuccino wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:57 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:56 pm I guess the problem is in actually defining stealing
taking what is not given
Indeed, but some of the examples above do not involve taking anything; merely creating.
Post Reply