# Is Downloading Movies/mp3's Sin?



## LeeJUk

Hello People,

One question that continually bugs me is this, is downloading or watching movies online and say downloading ebooks of books that are commercially being sold, is it sin?


Please state your arguments.


----------



## David

I would say yes, and I have stressed this to other Christian friends. I'm typing on my mobile, so I'll keep this short.

Piracy is considered theft almost everywhere in the West. Theft is a sin. If you don't agree that piracy is theft, the Bible tells us to obey the laws placed on us by our governments. Piracy is against the law.

I don't know the Bible verses off-hand that I loosely referenced, but I'm sure another brother or sister does. If not, I'll find them tomorrow.


----------



## toddpedlar

If it is illegal to do so, then you are bound by Romans 13 to obey the government and not do it. Obviously if you are downloading things you've paid for, then that's no problem - and/or if they are offered for free by the publishing house or artist (as in self-produced things) then that too is fine. But if you're talking about downloading mp3's from file sharing sites, that is theft, which is a direct violation of the 8th commandment.


----------



## JBaldwin

I would agree. In some cases, it is legal to download information for personal use, but not for commercial use. In others you may not make copies for any reason without paying. You should check the details before downloading.


----------



## ClayPot

If the movie or mp3s are downloaded legally--like from iTunes, Amazon, etc., then of course it is okay. But if you are not paying for them (and they are not actually a free download) then it is stealing plain and simple, which is obviously a sin.

I struggled with this when I first got to college because everyone else did it and it was so easy to do. At first I didn't realize I was doing anything wrong, but even once I did, I still didn't want to stop doing it. I used the usual excuses of, "They charge too much", "Its not that good", "I'm only watching it once", "Its like borrowing from a friend", etc. However, the Lord eventually convicted me that I was just using these excuses to steal. Once I came under that conviction, the mp3s, movies, software, etc. was removed from my computer and I finally had a clear conscience. And in the end, I didn't miss it anyway!


----------



## au5t1n

The question didn't say "illegally downloading," but I'll assume that's what you meant. I believe it is wrong, but the majority of people disagree with me - although maybe not on the PB, who knows.

That said, I'll add that it's kind of a silly law. The record companies profit more from the increased music attention, which results in bigger concert sales - their primary source of income. But silly or not, it's still illegal. They have the right to sell their recordings and not have them copied and distributed free, if that's what they want to do. They went to the trouble and paid the money to produce the recording.

Edit: I misspoke. I should have said it's a silly policy, not law. The law should stay the same and businesses might do well to change their policies.


----------



## Skyler

That's interesting. I was just thinking about making a post on illegally copying mp3s/videos, and then I log into the PB and it's the top thread. 

Legally? Yes, downloading videos/mp3s (without paying for them) is technically illegal. I would argue that watching streaming videos is no different in the end than borrowing them from a public library, but the law is still the law, and we are exhorted to obey especially the unjust laws.


----------



## Webservant

Stealing is a sin. iTunes isn't terribly expensive. Musicians have to eat, too!


----------



## toddpedlar

Skyler said:


> That's interesting. I was just thinking about making a post on illegally copying mp3s/videos, and then I log into the PB and it's the top thread.
> 
> Legally? Yes, downloading videos/mp3s (without paying for them) is technically illegal. I would argue that watching streaming videos is no different in the end than borrowing them from a public library, but the law is still the law, and we are exhorted to obey especially the unjust laws.



Downloading pirated videos is NOT anything close to the same thing as borrowing them from the public library. The public library has specific authorization to share what they purchase. Pirates do not. I would hope we recognize the difference, because it's an important one.


----------



## Kim G

Would you walk into an entertainment store, take a physical DVD or CD from the shelves, and walk out without paying? Even if the store manager said, "You can take it without paying," it still wouldn't make it right because you would be defrauding the company and artist who produced the DVD or CD. 

Just because stealing electronically is easier to do and harder to get caught doesn't make it okay. Remember the eighth commandment!

When I went to college (Christian college, no less), everyone was doing it. I was sent many mp3 files that I didn't know were illegal downloads. When I found out, I deleted them all. It wasn't easy because I liked many of them, but I didn't obtain them legally.


----------



## ericfromcowtown

We'll download television shows that we missed via bit torrent. If we had a Tivo / PVR we'd do the same thing and similarly skip the commercials. I can justify this, but we don't download movies or music that we'd otherwise rent from the video store or purchase online. I had a ton of pirated .mp3 at one time that I deleted when I came to the place where I recognized this as theft.


----------



## boschertjd18

What happens if you rewarded the artist(s) years ago and purchased the music on an older media type, say record or tape. Let's assume the media is very worn and so transferring to the PC yields a crappy product. Does that make it any more or less acceptable to download without paying (again)?


----------



## PresbyDane

Yes it is sin if you do not pay for them, it is the same as stealing.


----------



## Quickened

I used to do this way back when.

My theory was that i was borrowing music that i normally would borrow from a friend. I tend to forget i have people's CD's so this was a great way. I wouldnt have to worry about returning it to someone and could just delete it from the HD when done.

What if i tape it off the radio? Does that fall under the same category? Or VHS recording a movie off of TV? The format has changed. Not that i do anymore but i see no difference between the two.

With the advent of DVR the line is obscured. Do i buy an overpriced set of a TV show that will end up collecting dust after 1 or 2 viewings? Do i wait for each episode and DVR those or Do i download them directly from a bit torrent site? I already pay for cable so i would most likely just DVR them. But what difference is there if i already have the cable (and station it is on) + DVR box over using a torrent site? To me it just seems that one method is more convenient then the other.

I would never buy something blind. I would always view or listen to it first otherwise i could possibly buy something thats not worth it. So i may wait for radio play or borrow it from a friend.

If i am borrowing it for a time physically what is the difference If i am borrowing it from that same friend digitally? That way he doesnt lose his copy, I dont lose it or damage it accidentally.

Not that i really do anymore. I found many years ago that i would listen to something once and that was it. I find the radio to be more convenient as i dont have to queue anything up and they can worry about variety instead of me making a playlist.


----------



## Zenas

If you walk into a bookstore and take a book from the shelf that costs $13.99 and walk out without paying it, it's theft. 

If you buy a book from a man who says that he stole the book, it's theft. 

If you take the book from a man who says he stole the book, it's theft.

If you download the book without paying for it, to the person who rightfully has the rights to distribute it, it's theft.


----------



## jogri17

I have to say yes BUT I do go through loopholes sometimes. For example its not illegal to WATCH an uploaded illegally movie online but its illegal to opload or download it in Canada. So thats what I do. Its probably a bit questionable but I break no laws. I have only downloaded a a couple of songs illegally but only songs that I have already bought but lost via harddrive crash, etc... I do think its time the laws get updated for the 21st century when it comes to copyright and its time that corporations start putting all their stuff online for free access to watch (they can still add even more ad space... think comedy central). The longer things stay the same the more money they loose.


----------



## au5t1n

jogri17 said:


> I have to say yes BUT I do go through loopholes sometimes. For example its not illegal to WATCH an uploaded illegally movie online but its illegal to opload or download it in Canada. So thats what I do. Its probably a bit questionable but I break no laws. I have only downloaded a a couple of songs illegally but only songs that I have already bought but lost via harddrive crash, etc... I do think its time the laws get updated for the 21st century when it comes to copyright and its time that corporations start putting all their stuff online for free access to watch (they can still add even more ad space... think comedy central). The longer things stay the same the more money they loose.



Regardless of what's more profitable for them in the long run, if you invest capital and labor into producing a product that there's a demand for, then you have a right to charge for your product if you desire. It isn't the copyright laws that need changing, it's the businesses' policies. Their rights should stay the same, but they should update their policies if you are indeed correct about profitability.


----------



## jogri17

austinww said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have to say yes BUT I do go through loopholes sometimes. For example its not illegal to WATCH an uploaded illegally movie online but its illegal to opload or download it in Canada. So thats what I do. Its probably a bit questionable but I break no laws. I have only downloaded a a couple of songs illegally but only songs that I have already bought but lost via harddrive crash, etc... I do think its time the laws get updated for the 21st century when it comes to copyright and its time that corporations start putting all their stuff online for free access to watch (they can still add even more ad space... think comedy central). The longer things stay the same the more money they loose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless of what's more profitable for them in the long run, if you invest capital and labor into producing a product that there's a demand for, then you have a right to charge for your product if you desire. It isn't the copyright laws that need changing, it's the businesses' policies. Their rights should stay the same, but they should update their policies if you are indeed correct about profitability.
Click to expand...

Well depends on what product of course, if it is something necessary for life and the well being of humans than I do support government regulation of prices (though not complete control). But over all I do agree with you.


----------



## au5t1n

jogri17 said:


> austinww said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have to say yes BUT I do go through loopholes sometimes. For example its not illegal to WATCH an uploaded illegally movie online but its illegal to opload or download it in Canada. So thats what I do. Its probably a bit questionable but I break no laws. I have only downloaded a a couple of songs illegally but only songs that I have already bought but lost via harddrive crash, etc... I do think its time the laws get updated for the 21st century when it comes to copyright and its time that corporations start putting all their stuff online for free access to watch (they can still add even more ad space... think comedy central). The longer things stay the same the more money they loose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless of what's more profitable for them in the long run, if you invest capital and labor into producing a product that there's a demand for, then you have a right to charge for your product if you desire. It isn't the copyright laws that need changing, it's the businesses' policies. Their rights should stay the same, but they should update their policies if you are indeed correct about profitability.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well depends on what product of course, if it is something necessary for life and the well being of humans than I do support government regulation of prices (though not complete control). But over all I do agree with you.
Click to expand...


But that's stealing. They invested their own property (capital and the cost of labor) into making it, and they own it. They don't have to sell it at all if they don't want to. But if they do sell it, they may charge what they see fit - whether it be medicine or origami giraffes.


----------



## Berean

You might find this interestng. I stopped after reading this thread.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f25/software-piracy-2304/


----------



## jogri17

austinww said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> austinww said:
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless of what's more profitable for them in the long run, if you invest capital and labor into producing a product that there's a demand for, then you have a right to charge for your product if you desire. It isn't the copyright laws that need changing, it's the businesses' policies. Their rights should stay the same, but they should update their policies if you are indeed correct about profitability.
> 
> 
> 
> Well depends on what product of course, if it is something necessary for life and the well being of humans than I do support government regulation of prices (though not complete control). But over all I do agree with you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But that's stealing. They invested their own property (capital and the cost of labor) into making it, and they own it. They don't have to sell it at all if they don't want to. But if they do sell it, they may charge what they see fit - whether it be medicine or origami giraffes.
Click to expand...

That a political debate. I would say that apart of living in a society and under a government means that there is an moral obligation to sell things as cheap as possible and no profit when lives are at risk. A policeman off the clock is still required to act in a certain manner all the time even if he is not paid. And I would make the point that those who work in the healthcare industry have the same obligation to work for the motive of saving lives above all. Yes there may be profit but when profit becomes the sole factor and you become all Ann raynd you will cut corners all the time in order to get more money even if lives are cost needessly (i.e. Vioox- many lives were saved because of it except that those who had heart conditions died while taking it. the corporation did a mental cost benefit analysis and took the risk about lying about all the side effects in order to sell more of a decent drug... this is why) 

But you cannot compare tv shows with medicine ethically. That is just ethically irresponsible in my judgment. Also not all countries have the same laws when it comes to these things so that is another consideration...


----------



## Grillsy

Yes, unless it is public domain then you're okay. Which is great for you in the UK since the laws determining what and when it goes into PD are less strict.

Some items in the public domain are still sold commercially as well. These are usually your bargain books or $1 dollar DVDs. Not sure what your cheap DVDs sell for in Scotland. 

I can elaborate more if necessary.


----------



## jogri17

Grillsy said:


> Yes, unless it is public domain then you're okay. Which is great for you in the UK since the laws determining what and when it goes into PD are less strict.
> 
> Some items in the public domain are still sold commercially as well. These are usually your bargain books or $1 dollar DVDs. Not sure what your cheap DVDs sell for in Scotland.
> 
> I can elaborate more if necessary.



also is making somebody a mixed cd stealing because you are just taking stuff you bought and giving it to another?


----------



## Grillsy

jogri17 said:


> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, unless it is public domain then you're okay. Which is great for you in the UK since the laws determining what and when it goes into PD are less strict.
> 
> Some items in the public domain are still sold commercially as well. These are usually your bargain books or $1 dollar DVDs. Not sure what your cheap DVDs sell for in Scotland.
> 
> I can elaborate more if necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also is making somebody a mixed cd stealing because you are just taking stuff you bought and giving it to another?
Click to expand...


If it is an MP3 you have legally downloaded then most likely it is not illegal just to make the one copy and give away. So long as you are not selling them.

If you are ripping them from a CD and them making copies then there are some issues. But the one copy mixed CD should be fine.


----------



## McPatrickClan

I think that generally, stealing (which is what a lot of the downloading is online) is illegal, of course. However, I think this is a bit of a gray area... to some degree. I guess I can't really come up with an example but just see a lot of abuse of the law by the people in power and don't like it- so forget what I said! It's wrong!


----------



## jogri17

Grillsy said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, unless it is public domain then you're okay. Which is great for you in the UK since the laws determining what and when it goes into PD are less strict.
> 
> Some items in the public domain are still sold commercially as well. These are usually your bargain books or $1 dollar DVDs. Not sure what your cheap DVDs sell for in Scotland.
> 
> I can elaborate more if necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also is making somebody a mixed cd stealing because you are just taking stuff you bought and giving it to another?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If it is an MP3 you have legally downloaded then most likely it is not illegal just to make the one copy and give away. So long as you are not selling them.
> 
> If you are ripping them from a CD and them making copies then there are some issues. But the one copy mixed CD should be fine.
Click to expand...


Here comes the grey question: What about if you make an mp3 cd with several albums on it and the track lists are all mixed up and that is the gift cd. Is that illegal? If so then why isn't just a normal mixed cd illegal?


----------



## toddpedlar

Grillsy said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, unless it is public domain then you're okay. Which is great for you in the UK since the laws determining what and when it goes into PD are less strict.
> 
> Some items in the public domain are still sold commercially as well. These are usually your bargain books or $1 dollar DVDs. Not sure what your cheap DVDs sell for in Scotland.
> 
> I can elaborate more if necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also is making somebody a mixed cd stealing because you are just taking stuff you bought and giving it to another?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If it is an MP3 you have legally downloaded then most likely it is not illegal just to make the one copy and give away. So long as you are not selling them.
> 
> If you are ripping them from a CD and them making copies then there are some issues. But the one copy mixed CD should be fine.
Click to expand...


Why is ONE okay, but more than one not?

In any case - one or more than one - this is not legal to do.


----------



## Grillsy

jogri17 said:


> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> also is making somebody a mixed cd stealing because you are just taking stuff you bought and giving it to another?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it is an MP3 you have legally downloaded then most likely it is not illegal just to make the one copy and give away. So long as you are not selling them.
> 
> If you are ripping them from a CD and them making copies then there are some issues. But the one copy mixed CD should be fine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here comes the grey question: What about if you make an mp3 cd with several albums on it and the track lists are all mixed up and that is the gift cd. Is that illegal? If so then why isn't just a normal mixed cd illegal?
Click to expand...


The Audio Home Recording Act allows you to legally make copies for yourself and the language also hints that giving a copy to a friend is fine. However that right does not extend to CD burners embedded in your pc. You can legally make on backup copy of a purchased audio cd using any technology.

You can however make a copy for yourself from mp3s, so long as they are legally downloaded. If you give away that one copy i'm not sure if it would be illegal or not. I'll check the rules at work and see just what they are.

-----Added 12/5/2009 at 03:14:22 EST-----



toddpedlar said:


> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> also is making somebody a mixed cd stealing because you are just taking stuff you bought and giving it to another?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it is an MP3 you have legally downloaded then most likely it is not illegal just to make the one copy and give away. So long as you are not selling them.
> 
> If you are ripping them from a CD and them making copies then there are some issues. But the one copy mixed CD should be fine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is ONE okay, but more than one not?
> 
> In any case - one or more than one - this is not legal to do.
Click to expand...


Because you can legally make one backup copy of the music you have purchased.

In any case the legal case in grey because recording and rights laws are far behind the technology used to record the media. 

For individuals doing this it is increasingly difficult to follow all of the rules. I have it a little simpler in the radio business, we just pay for the rights.


----------



## gene_mingo

While the actual laws concerning copyright are important in this discussion, shouldn't we also consider the artist who made the music in the first place? If he/she made the music/movie with the intent to sell it, then wouldn't it be considered stealing if they are not getting paid when you acquire their material? 

I don't think that the law in any particular country can take away the moral obligation to follow a commandment.


----------



## Grillsy

gene_mingo said:


> While the actual laws concerning copyright are important in this discussion, shouldn't we also consider the artist who made the music in the first place? If he/she made the music/movie with the intent to sell it, then wouldn't it be considered stealing if they are not getting paid when you acquire their material?
> 
> I don't think that the law in any particular country can take away the moral obligation to follow a commandment.



You're right. But my last few answers were over the question of music legally purchased.

I'm not sure if you commenting on that or the OP.


----------



## jogri17

gene_mingo said:


> While the actual laws concerning copyright are important in this discussion, shouldn't we also consider the artist who made the music in the first place? If he/she made the music/movie with the intent to sell it, then wouldn't it be considered stealing if they are not getting paid when you acquire their material?
> 
> I don't think that the law in any particular country can take away the moral obligation to follow a commandment.



the intention of the author while is nice to talk about really is not that important to the entire conversation. The writer or the band or the artist signs with a label and it is the corporation that releases it not the individual most of the time. The artist gets a piece of the profits of course but it is the company that makes most money off it. Once an artist signs a contract with X, they loose must of that right. Thats the reason why record companies exist. Artists give up X in order to get them to pay to produce a reccord, and do publicity, and get gigs and set up concerts.


----------



## wmc1982

mininova shut down last week anyway.


----------



## toddpedlar

Grillsy said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it is an MP3 you have legally downloaded then most likely it is not illegal just to make the one copy and give away. So long as you are not selling them.
> 
> If you are ripping them from a CD and them making copies then there are some issues. But the one copy mixed CD should be fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here comes the grey question: What about if you make an mp3 cd with several albums on it and the track lists are all mixed up and that is the gift cd. Is that illegal? If so then why isn't just a normal mixed cd illegal?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Audio Home Recording Act allows you to legally make copies for yourself and the language also hints that giving a copy to a friend is fine. However that right does not extend to CD burners embedded in your pc. You can legally make on backup copy of a purchased audio cd using any technology.
> 
> You can however make a copy for yourself from mp3s, so long as they are legally downloaded. If you give away that one copy i'm not sure if it would be illegal or not. I'll check the rules at work and see just what they are.
> 
> -----Added 12/5/2009 at 03:14:22 EST-----
> 
> 
> 
> toddpedlar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it is an MP3 you have legally downloaded then most likely it is not illegal just to make the one copy and give away. So long as you are not selling them.
> 
> If you are ripping them from a CD and them making copies then there are some issues. But the one copy mixed CD should be fine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why is ONE okay, but more than one not?
> 
> In any case - one or more than one - this is not legal to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because you can legally make one backup copy of the music you have purchased.
> 
> In any case the legal case in grey because recording and rights laws are far behind the technology used to record the media.
> 
> For individuals doing this it is increasingly difficult to follow all of the rules. I have it a little simpler in the radio business, we just pay for the rights.
Click to expand...


Why do you suppose it's rightly called a "backup copy"? It is NOT so that you can distribute it to others.


----------



## Peairtach

Webservant said:


> Stealing is a sin. iTunes isn't terribly expensive. Musicians have to eat, too!



I used to download quite a bit of music for free (illegally). Two or three years ago I deleted the mp3's and threw out the CDs produced in this way.

I now only download legally. It's stealing from lots of different people along with the musicians.

I prayed that God would forgive me for this in Christ, and He has.


----------



## Grillsy

toddpedlar said:


> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here comes the grey question: What about if you make an mp3 cd with several albums on it and the track lists are all mixed up and that is the gift cd. Is that illegal? If so then why isn't just a normal mixed cd illegal?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Audio Home Recording Act allows you to legally make copies for yourself and the language also hints that giving a copy to a friend is fine. However that right does not extend to CD burners embedded in your pc. You can legally make on backup copy of a purchased audio cd using any technology.
> 
> You can however make a copy for yourself from mp3s, so long as they are legally downloaded. If you give away that one copy i'm not sure if it would be illegal or not. I'll check the rules at work and see just what they are.
> 
> -----Added 12/5/2009 at 03:14:22 EST-----
> 
> 
> 
> toddpedlar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is ONE okay, but more than one not?
> 
> In any case - one or more than one - this is not legal to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because you can legally make one backup copy of the music you have purchased.
> 
> In any case the legal case in grey because recording and rights laws are far behind the technology used to record the media.
> 
> For individuals doing this it is increasingly difficult to follow all of the rules. I have it a little simpler in the radio business, we just pay for the rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why do you suppose it's rightly called a "backup copy"? It is NOT so that you can distribute it to others.
Click to expand...


My bad. I could have mistyped something or maybe I was unclear. I was trying to express the legality of the actual making of the CD not the giving of it to a friend.


----------



## jogri17

so what if you use an external dvd burner then is it legal?


----------



## Peairtach

There's something called reasonable use in US law on making copies of copyright material you have paid for, which may be a sensible provision for "reasonable" limited copying.

I don't know if this is true of English, Scots or EU law.


This subject is technically for the "God's Law" section, by the way.

Here's John Frame's article on this. I don't remember the details of what he says, not having read it in a while:-

The Other Shoe: or, Copyright and the Reasonable Use of Technology


----------



## gene_mingo

Grillsy said:


> toddpedlar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Audio Home Recording Act allows you to legally make copies for yourself and the language also hints that giving a copy to a friend is fine. However that right does not extend to CD burners embedded in your pc. You can legally make on backup copy of a purchased audio cd using any technology.
> 
> You can however make a copy for yourself from mp3s, so long as they are legally downloaded. If you give away that one copy i'm not sure if it would be illegal or not. I'll check the rules at work and see just what they are.
> 
> -----Added 12/5/2009 at 03:14:22 EST-----
> 
> 
> 
> Because you can legally make one backup copy of the music you have purchased.
> 
> In any case the legal case in grey because recording and rights laws are far behind the technology used to record the media.
> 
> For individuals doing this it is increasingly difficult to follow all of the rules. I have it a little simpler in the radio business, we just pay for the rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you suppose it's rightly called a "backup copy"? It is NOT so that you can distribute it to others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My bad. I could have mistyped something or maybe I was unclear. I was trying to express the legality of the actual making of the CD not the giving of it to a friend.
Click to expand...


This is from the Terms of Use at Amazon for MP3:



> 2. Digital Content
> 
> 2.1 Rights Granted. Upon your payment of our fees for Digital Content, we grant you a non-exclusive, non-transferable right to use the Digital Content for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use, subject to and in accordance with the Terms of Use. You may copy, store, transfer and burn the Digital Content only for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use, subject to and in accordance with the Terms of Use.
> 
> 2.2 Restrictions. You represent, warrant and agree that you will use the Service only for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use and not for any redistribution of the Digital Content or other use restricted in this Section 2.2. You agree not to infringe the rights of the Digital Content's copyright owners and to comply with all applicable laws in your use of the Digital Content. Except as set forth in Section 2.1 above, you agree that you will not redistribute, transmit, assign, sell, broadcast, rent, share, lend, modify, adapt, edit, license or otherwise transfer or use the Digital Content. You are not granted any synchronization, public performance, promotional use, commercial sale, resale, reproduction or distribution rights for the Digital Content. You acknowledge that the Digital Content embodies the intellectual property of a third party and is protected by law.


----------



## Grillsy

gene_mingo said:


> Grillsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toddpedlar said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you suppose it's rightly called a "backup copy"? It is NOT so that you can distribute it to others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My bad. I could have mistyped something or maybe I was unclear. I was trying to express the legality of the actual making of the CD not the giving of it to a friend.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is from the Terms of Use at Amazon for MP3:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Digital Content
> 
> 2.1 Rights Granted. Upon your payment of our fees for Digital Content, we grant you a non-exclusive, non-transferable right to use the Digital Content for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use, subject to and in accordance with the Terms of Use. You may copy, store, transfer and burn the Digital Content only for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use, subject to and in accordance with the Terms of Use.
> 
> 2.2 Restrictions. You represent, warrant and agree that you will use the Service only for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use and not for any redistribution of the Digital Content or other use restricted in this Section 2.2. You agree not to infringe the rights of the Digital Content's copyright owners and to comply with all applicable laws in your use of the Digital Content. Except as set forth in Section 2.1 above, you agree that you will not redistribute, transmit, assign, sell, broadcast, rent, share, lend, modify, adapt, edit, license or otherwise transfer or use the Digital Content. You are not granted any synchronization, public performance, promotional use, commercial sale, resale, reproduction or distribution rights for the Digital Content. You acknowledge that the Digital Content embodies the intellectual property of a third party and is protected by law.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Well, that answers things for those using Amazon's digital music service. Thanks Gene


----------



## gene_mingo

And Itunes:



> Usage Rules
> 
> (i) Your use of the Products is conditioned upon your prior acceptance of the terms of this Agreement.
> 
> (ii) You shall be authorized to use the Products only for personal, noncommercial use.
> 
> (iii) You shall be authorized to use the Products on five Apple-authorized devices at any time, except in the case of Movie Rentals, as described below.
> 
> (iv) You shall be able to store Products from up to five different Accounts on certain devices, such as an iPod or iPhone, and Apple TV at a time; provided that each iPhone may sync ring tone Products with only a single Apple-authorized device at a time, and that syncing an iPhone with another Apple-authorized device will cause any ring tone Products stored on such iPhone to be erased and, if you so choose, to be replaced with any ring tone Products stored on such other Apple-authorized device. Additional restrictions apply to Movies Rentals, as described below.
> 
> (v) You shall be authorized to burn an audio playlist up to seven times.
> 
> (vi) You shall not be entitled to burn video Products or ring tone Products.
> 
> (vii) You shall be entitled to export, burn (if applicable) or copy (if applicable) Products solely for personal, noncommercial use.


----------



## Webservant

Richard Tallach said:


> Webservant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stealing is a sin. iTunes isn't terribly expensive. Musicians have to eat, too!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I used to download quite a bit of music for free (illegally). Two or three years ago I deleted the mp3's and threw out the CDs produced in this way.
> 
> I now only download legally. It's stealing from lots of different people along with the musicians.
> 
> I prayed that God would forgive me for this in Christ, and He has.
Click to expand...

Brother, same here. I had less of an excuse than most, since I was a musician and I should have known better.


----------



## JM

P2P downloading is legal in Canada, isn't it?

Canada deems P2P downloading legal - CNET News
File sharing in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2005: BMG Canada Inc. v. John Doe - Appeal

In 2005, the controversial ruling of Justice Konrad von Finckenstein, making file uploading on peer-to-peer systems legal, was set aside by the Federal Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal held that although the original case should be dismissed due to lack of evidence linking the unnamed defendants to the alleged copyright infringements, the question of the legality of peer-to-peer file sharing must be decided in a future case.​
Canadian Police Tolerates Piracy For Personal Use | TorrentFreak

File sharing improves sales?

http://torrentfreak.com/piracy-boosts-cd-sales-071103/


----------



## Dao

jogri17 said:


> . . For example its not illegal to WATCH an uploaded illegally movie online but its illegal to upload or download it in Canada. . . . (clipped)


 Is that a fact? I'm relieved to hear that.


----------



## Skyler

toddpedlar said:


> Skyler said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's interesting. I was just thinking about making a post on illegally copying mp3s/videos, and then I log into the PB and it's the top thread.
> 
> Legally? Yes, downloading videos/mp3s (without paying for them) is technically illegal. I would argue that watching streaming videos is no different in the end than borrowing them from a public library, but the law is still the law, and we are exhorted to obey especially the unjust laws.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Downloading pirated videos is NOT anything close to the same thing as borrowing them from the public library. The public library has specific authorization to share what they purchase. Pirates do not. I would hope we recognize the difference, because it's an important one.
Click to expand...


I'm saying from the artist's perspective, he/she gets no more compensation from someone borrowing the movie from the library than from watching it online. I could be wrong on this, but I don't think libraries have to pay extra to lend them out to patrons, do they?

I'm not debating that it's illegal (though I have heard, as jogri17 mentioned, that is legal to watch online videos--I'd need an expert's opinion on that), but whether it should be illegal.

Oh, one other thing--if you want to listen to music that you don't own online, check out Pandora Radio - Listen to Free Internet Radio, Find New Music. It's an internet radio service that allows you to create your own stations of the kind of music you like to listen to for free. There are some restrictions, but I think it's worth it.


----------



## TheDow

Pandora is nice, especially in that they index each song using the characteristics of that song, which means you can hear a lot of the type of music you like, but still hear a great many new artists.

I also used to copy DVD's, and download music illegally. Pared my "collection" down when it really became apparent to me that it was sin.

I am, however, extremely frustrated with the laws concerning copyright, especially with regards to backups. At one point, the prevailing opinion was that you could make a backup, as long as you didn't circumvent so-called copy-protection to do so. When it comes to making backups of DVD's so your child doesn't destroy your originals, that interpretation of the law makes you a multiple offender, just for being cautious. Very frustrating.

I now only download through Amazon, and have ripped all my CD's for listening on the go.


----------



## David

David said:


> I would say yes, and I have stressed this to other Christian friends. I'm typing on my mobile, so I'll keep this short.
> 
> Piracy is considered theft almost everywhere in the West. Theft is a sin. If you don't agree that piracy is theft, the Bible tells us to obey the laws placed on us by our governments. Piracy is against the law.
> 
> I don't know the Bible verses off-hand that I loosely referenced, but I'm sure another brother or sister does. If not, I'll find them tomorrow.



Here's the open letter I wrote to Christian friends a couple of months ago, which includes the verses I used.



> It has been brought to my attention that a number of fellow Christians are either actively pirating movies, music and computer software, or have "stopped", yet haven't actually deleted what they already pirated.
> 
> The Bible has the following to say regarding theft:
> 
> Exodus 20:15
> 15 Thou shalt not steal.
> 
> 1 Corinthians 6:9-11
> 9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
> 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
> 11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
> 
> Ephesians 4:28
> 28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.
> 
> 
> God clearly condemns theft, and except by His grace, thieves will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Hence, those under God's grace are told to steal no more in Ephesians 4:28. However, there are Christians who would argue that piracy is not theft. For them I have some more verses:
> 
> Romans 13:1-7
> 1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
> 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
> 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
> 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
> 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
> 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
> 7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
> 
> 1 Peter 2:13-14
> 13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
> 14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
> 
> 
> Even if piracy is not theft, we are still clearly told to obey the laws of the land. Last time I checked, it is against Australian law to engage in piracy. I therefore encourage fellow Christians to not only cease pirating, but also uninstall, delete or throw out any pirated material they currently possess and repent to God.


----------



## Tim

What about YouTube? People take their music recordings and place it in the form of a movie, perhaps with the album cover as the picture that is showing during playing. If you have internet 24/7, you can get almost any popular song, whenever you like. 

I know that we on the PB often put links to YouTube songs, and I never knew what to think about this. I know that YouTube is streaming, rather than downloading, but that can be circumvented with various downloaders and converters. 

I like YouTube, but I would change my habits to honor God.


----------



## LeeJUk

Youtube as long as it advertises the Itunes link for the song @ the Bottom (if it's an official music track / music video) then it's all legally fine for youtube, the poster and the listener.


----------

