Since its obviously stealing do you still do it?
Downloading music from the internet...
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Nope. I buy my music from Sam Goody's and the Christian Book Store in town.
shilohproject
New member
Not paying an artist for his/her work may be an affront to their light bill!:help:
So you are asserting that art musems should charge no addmission fee?
And are you further asserting that I should be able to make prints of my favorite artist and re-sell them for my own profit or for my own personal use?
Shaun
New member
I have tons of songs on my computer from before Jesus found me. I personally view it as stealing--back then, I just didn't care.
Now I download only to learn the music for the worship band I play in. I plan on going on a buying spree here shortly.
Best Buy won't know what hit 'em.
Now I download only to learn the music for the worship band I play in. I plan on going on a buying spree here shortly.
Best Buy won't know what hit 'em.
May I recommend a great alternative?
Apple's Music Store
They have hundreds of thousands of songs all for .99 each and they add more songs daily!
Completely legal and the artist also benefits!
Not to mention you don't have to buy a whole CD just to get one song you like. :up:
wholearmor
New member
The stealers can always justify stealing until someone steals from them.
White, would you care to respond to my response to your initial post?
.Ant
New member
Piracy is for pirates, not Christians
Piracy is for pirates, not Christians
Piracy is called piracy for a reason. It's stealing. Obviously, Beethoven's Sonatas are okay to download, because Beethoven is dead (and he didn't set up a trust or anything).
Piracy is for pirates, not Christians
I hope you're deleting those songs then...
Piracy is called piracy for a reason. It's stealing. Obviously, Beethoven's Sonatas are okay to download, because Beethoven is dead (and he didn't set up a trust or anything).
SwItChBlAdE
New member
Knight you are totally going to put me out on the street if anyone else finds out that someone is as good as Best Buy! .... Remember we do match prices!
wholearmor
New member
It'll only work if you have a Mac computer, right?
It's not stealing. It's sharing. I use a service called "Kazaa." It creates a folder on your desktop that you can fill with songs. So not only do you download songs, but people download from you. It is no worse than using a double tape deck. You take, you give in return. It has a rating system so that it gives lower priority to people who don't offer much to share. So I keep about 60 songs in my shared folder, and I'm still considered pretty low. Most of the songs I download are from the 70s and 80s, and they are songs that I have once owned on tape or CD but then sold, so in a sense I have paid for a lot of this stuff before in the first place.
It is no different to me than asking someone if I can read a novel after they are done with it. You don't have to buy your own copy of the book.
If I sold the CD's I burned, then I think it would be illegal and stealing, since I am trying to make a profit from free copies of the music.
It is no different to me than asking someone if I can read a novel after they are done with it. You don't have to buy your own copy of the book.
If I sold the CD's I burned, then I think it would be illegal and stealing, since I am trying to make a profit from free copies of the music.
wholearmor
New member
OK, october, quit your job or whatever it is you do for a living and decide to make your living as a musician. Write a song and put it in your Kazaa folder and put it out there for everyone to share. When's your first dollar from your musician profession going to come in?
Rav_Yeshai
New member
stealing? no. sin? yes
stealing? no. sin? yes
Shalom,
We live in a day and age where the deceit of wealth determines what is "stealing". When technology grows, so will the law to protect the pocket of corp america.
I have many friends that are signed to "christian, meesianic jewish and secular" labels. Bottom line.
artists are pawns.
anyone remember when metallica was "anti-napster"?
Years from now (maybe even now) people will say "metalli-who?"
many of my friends have told me even the "christian- messianic " labels are run by the all unmighty dollar.
but is it stealing to download music under the digital millenium act ?
No!
is it a breach of Torah?
Yes!
how so? you might ask
It is not a sin to share materials. if it is i would ask where do you draw the line?
truth is consistent. truth is true the world around I always say
take a look at the following and tell me 1 where the line of theft is, 2 which one is theft and 3 WHO determines what is theft to begin with!
downloading a song
hearing a song from someones stereo across the street and recording it
playing your best friend a song over the phone
playing a song in a chat room
strange how cultural varience and social construct bends perceptual ordanience.
however it is a sin to download music that has a copyright.
NOT BECAUSE ITS STEALING.
Because its breaking the law. which we are commanded to uphold, as long as it does not negate the word of Yahweh Eloah.
Shalom
stealing? no. sin? yes
Shalom,
We live in a day and age where the deceit of wealth determines what is "stealing". When technology grows, so will the law to protect the pocket of corp america.
I have many friends that are signed to "christian, meesianic jewish and secular" labels. Bottom line.
artists are pawns.
anyone remember when metallica was "anti-napster"?
Years from now (maybe even now) people will say "metalli-who?"
many of my friends have told me even the "christian- messianic " labels are run by the all unmighty dollar.
but is it stealing to download music under the digital millenium act ?
No!
is it a breach of Torah?
Yes!
how so? you might ask
It is not a sin to share materials. if it is i would ask where do you draw the line?
truth is consistent. truth is true the world around I always say
take a look at the following and tell me 1 where the line of theft is, 2 which one is theft and 3 WHO determines what is theft to begin with!
downloading a song
hearing a song from someones stereo across the street and recording it
playing your best friend a song over the phone
playing a song in a chat room
strange how cultural varience and social construct bends perceptual ordanience.
however it is a sin to download music that has a copyright.
NOT BECAUSE ITS STEALING.
Because its breaking the law. which we are commanded to uphold, as long as it does not negate the word of Yahweh Eloah.
Shalom
Last edited:
wholearmor
New member
Re: stealing? no. sin? yes
Re: stealing? no. sin? yes
The deceit of wealth determines what is stealing? How did you dream that up? Taking something of value without paying for it is stealing. Always has been and always will be. If it weren't for thieves, laws wouldn't have to be passed to protect the pockets of corporate America or to protect the pockets of you and I for that matter.
If artists are pawns then I'm the Queen of Sheba. I'd like to be a pawn like some of them are. I work at least 40 hours a week. I have to be there when they tell me, I can't take a break until they tell me, I can't eat lunch until they tell me, whether I'm hungry or not. I can't take my afternoon break until they tell me, I can't go home until they tell me, I can't take a vacation until they tell me, and I can't make any more money than they give me. Who's the pawn?
Yes, someday they may say "Metalli who," but, 1., what does that have to do with stealing Metallica's music, and, 2., hardly any one will ever say, "The Rolling who?," or "The Beatle who?."
Downloading a song is theft because it is of such high quality.
Recording a song from across the street is useless because of all
the birds and booming car stereos driving by.
Playing a song over the phone is extremely low quality and not worth recording and saving.
Playing a song in a chat room isn't something someone is going to sit and listen to more than a CD they may purchase.
I assume this word you used, ordanience, is supposed to be ordinance,
right? And this word, varience, is supposed to be variance I suspect. Anyway, cultural variance and social construct have nothing
to do with what stealing is.
I can't even comment on the last two paragraphs because I have no idea what you're talking about. Your entire post makes no sense to me.
Re: stealing? no. sin? yes
Originally posted by Rav_Yeshai
Shalom,
We live in a day and age where the deceit of wealth determines what is "stealing". When technology grows, so will the law to protect the pocket of corp america.
I have many friends that are signed to "christian, meesianic jewish and secular" labels. Bottom line.
artists are pawns.
anyone remember when metallica was "anti-napster"?
Years from now (maybe even now) people will say "metalli-who?"
many of my friends have told me even the "christian- messianic " labels are run by the all unmighty dollar.
but is it stealing to download music under the digital millenium act ?
No!
is it a breach of Torah?
Yes!
how so? you might ask
It is not a sin to share materials. if it is i would ask where do you draw the line?
truth is consistent. truth is true the world around I always say
take a look at the following and tell me 1 where the line of theft is, 2 which one is theft and 3 WHO determines what is theft to begin with!
downloading a song
hearing a song from someones stereo across the street and recording it
playing your best friend a song over the phone
playing a song in a chat room
strange how cultural varience and social construct bends perceptual ordanience.
however it is a sin to download music that has a copyright.
NOT BECAUSE ITS STEALING.
Because its breaking the law. which we are commanded to uphold, as long as it does not negate the word of Yahweh Eloah.
Shalom
The deceit of wealth determines what is stealing? How did you dream that up? Taking something of value without paying for it is stealing. Always has been and always will be. If it weren't for thieves, laws wouldn't have to be passed to protect the pockets of corporate America or to protect the pockets of you and I for that matter.
If artists are pawns then I'm the Queen of Sheba. I'd like to be a pawn like some of them are. I work at least 40 hours a week. I have to be there when they tell me, I can't take a break until they tell me, I can't eat lunch until they tell me, whether I'm hungry or not. I can't take my afternoon break until they tell me, I can't go home until they tell me, I can't take a vacation until they tell me, and I can't make any more money than they give me. Who's the pawn?
Yes, someday they may say "Metalli who," but, 1., what does that have to do with stealing Metallica's music, and, 2., hardly any one will ever say, "The Rolling who?," or "The Beatle who?."
Downloading a song is theft because it is of such high quality.
Recording a song from across the street is useless because of all
the birds and booming car stereos driving by.
Playing a song over the phone is extremely low quality and not worth recording and saving.
Playing a song in a chat room isn't something someone is going to sit and listen to more than a CD they may purchase.
I assume this word you used, ordanience, is supposed to be ordinance,
right? And this word, varience, is supposed to be variance I suspect. Anyway, cultural variance and social construct have nothing
to do with what stealing is.
I can't even comment on the last two paragraphs because I have no idea what you're talking about. Your entire post makes no sense to me.
Rav_Yeshai
New member
social construct and moral presentation
social construct and moral presentation
Shalom,
I would like to correct you on some of the statements you have made in error.
"Taking something of value without paying for it is stealing."
Lets disect this statement. I have 3 problems with it (as does Yahweh Eloah)
taking
something
and value
all perceptual
who determines what they are? you? the recording industry? bob down the street?
"taking something..."
hmmmm. anything? in my ears? air? the point I made in my first post was the something here is what is in question!
In the millenium digital copyright act the "something" is music by new technological varience as a catalyst for distrubution.
Lets move on, "...of value without paying for it"
Who determines what is of value? you? me?
The owner of the property? yes, that is a correct statement.
but as we can see the owners of music in our culture have been "selective" on what is "taking music (that is valuable) without paying for it.
and thus making the laws implied at best : perceptual
kind of like saying what you have ---> "we will arrest someone who copies an album of high quality music for their friend, but if its recorded over the phone, well, then its ok!"
REALLY?!?!
LOL!
this is laughable
look at the logistics and componets implied here:
copying on some sort of medium
music
and a varience of quality
hmmmm
so the varience of quality determines theft?!?!
the Torah says no matter the quality if you have taken an object that is owned by another (this does not include radio waves, micro waves, audio signals, ideas, visuals, words, etc.) it is stealing and wrong.
My whole point is that record co's have stretched the line (as have cable co's, radio stations, etc) to call intercepting by technology or sharing what is freely there STEALING.
It's a joke.
and As myself I have been a musician all my life, know the industry and do have friends in the industry.
artists ARE pawns compared to the labels.
who makes the lions share of the cash?
its a no brainer.
In 1999 epic closed down its "metal" dept. on a whim.
many metal artists who were with them were sold to other labels.
when I spoke of pawns I wasnt speaking of $
you could be paid a million a year and still be a barney fife
also I agree i one respect on what you said "If it weren't for thieves, laws wouldn't have to be passed to protect the pockets of corporate America or to protect the pockets of you and I for that matter. "
But I do believe that MOST laws have been made in the name of greed.
take for example many "Christians" who say : "this country was founded on godly morals!"
I agree, if your god is apollyon!
If I were to at gun point tell my neighbor to get out of his home and then tell him his home is now mine, then making him sign it over. I would be arrested so fast my jewish head would spin!
but this is the case of how this nation came to be.
Greed, .....its here to stay (until the messiah of all Israel comes!)
P.s. My english is not so good, but, as a wise man once told me, if court trials could be won on correcting spelling, lawyers would be english profesoors!
social construct and moral presentation
Shalom,
I would like to correct you on some of the statements you have made in error.
"Taking something of value without paying for it is stealing."
Lets disect this statement. I have 3 problems with it (as does Yahweh Eloah)
taking
something
and value
all perceptual
who determines what they are? you? the recording industry? bob down the street?
"taking something..."
hmmmm. anything? in my ears? air? the point I made in my first post was the something here is what is in question!
In the millenium digital copyright act the "something" is music by new technological varience as a catalyst for distrubution.
Lets move on, "...of value without paying for it"
Who determines what is of value? you? me?
The owner of the property? yes, that is a correct statement.
but as we can see the owners of music in our culture have been "selective" on what is "taking music (that is valuable) without paying for it.
and thus making the laws implied at best : perceptual
kind of like saying what you have ---> "we will arrest someone who copies an album of high quality music for their friend, but if its recorded over the phone, well, then its ok!"
REALLY?!?!
LOL!
this is laughable
look at the logistics and componets implied here:
copying on some sort of medium
music
and a varience of quality
hmmmm
so the varience of quality determines theft?!?!
the Torah says no matter the quality if you have taken an object that is owned by another (this does not include radio waves, micro waves, audio signals, ideas, visuals, words, etc.) it is stealing and wrong.
My whole point is that record co's have stretched the line (as have cable co's, radio stations, etc) to call intercepting by technology or sharing what is freely there STEALING.
It's a joke.
and As myself I have been a musician all my life, know the industry and do have friends in the industry.
artists ARE pawns compared to the labels.
who makes the lions share of the cash?
its a no brainer.
In 1999 epic closed down its "metal" dept. on a whim.
many metal artists who were with them were sold to other labels.
when I spoke of pawns I wasnt speaking of $
you could be paid a million a year and still be a barney fife
also I agree i one respect on what you said "If it weren't for thieves, laws wouldn't have to be passed to protect the pockets of corporate America or to protect the pockets of you and I for that matter. "
But I do believe that MOST laws have been made in the name of greed.
take for example many "Christians" who say : "this country was founded on godly morals!"
I agree, if your god is apollyon!
If I were to at gun point tell my neighbor to get out of his home and then tell him his home is now mine, then making him sign it over. I would be arrested so fast my jewish head would spin!
but this is the case of how this nation came to be.
Greed, .....its here to stay (until the messiah of all Israel comes!)
P.s. My english is not so good, but, as a wise man once told me, if court trials could be won on correcting spelling, lawyers would be english profesoors!
Goose
New member
What bothers me the most, are the implications of the license and rights you have when purchasing something like a DVD or audio cd. It seems to be spilling over to things like DVD players and electronics. I can buy a car and modify it and reverse engineer it and what not. But I can't do that with some electronics, like DVD players that I own. Corporations are making it to where you really have little right to the property you own. It's very scary.
I don't know about you, but I'd rather pay once and own the merchandise, rather then it come down to some partial right of ownership.
I don't know about you, but I'd rather pay once and own the merchandise, rather then it come down to some partial right of ownership.