Moral question

[Mojo]

If a song that you really want (and is being played on the radio) was released in the USA in July, the rest of Europe in mid-August but is not out in the UK until the last week of October, is it moral to illegally download it?

 

[Old Timer]

A simple answer.

If the download is legal then there is no moral issue.

If the download is illegal, then that is a matter for you and your God, I would suggest.

 

[ChrisTheRef]

Yes, but I'd do it anyway

 

[Mojo]

FWIW, I never download illegally and am even considering using a Proxy to download it off Amazon but just wanted to get thoughts. It does seem a bit unfair that they do it though...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
What if I downloaded illegally now, and when it comes out pay for it?

 

[Yank 119]

FWIW, I never download illegally and am even considering using a Proxy to download it off Amazon but just wanted to get thoughts. It does seem a bit unfair that they do it though...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
What if I downloaded illegally now, and when it comes out pay for it?

If it's available to other parts of the world, I think you have every right to download it for your enjoyment, as the internet sees no boundaries. The moral issue is tricky, but I think that if you bought a copy after it's officially released, you're supporting the artist, which is what the real issue is in the end.

 

[mrcheek]

I would say it is perfectly acceptable to download it from an unauthorised source. I refuse to call this an "illegal download", as it has yet to be established legally that downloading music for personal use is against the law.

 

[JustinStacey.x]

I don't think it is different either way.

However, I do not have any qualms about pirating music, software or anything else produced by a company or artist who is either dead or no longer in the business. If you buy a CD for instance of a dead artist, you're just giving money to the record companies; and I pretty much refuse to buy music unless the artist is still in business because at least then I know I am furthering their cause somewhat. I would say around 75% (at least) of my music is totally legally bought, most of the rest of that is legally downloaded for free (free music such as game soundtracks).

I apply similar logic to software; if it is either outdated software (that the company is very unlikely to be even marketing anymore) or software made by a defunct company again I have no problems pirating it. If it has run its course and is no longer useful except for casual purposes it should be free anyway. I am also sure I read somewhere that Adobe isn't too badly affected by people downloading Photoshop off of Limewire because it's usually only for personal use; if anyone who actually profited from Photoshop illegally downloads it then it would hit them much harder because most of their customers will be business users who need the program, not just some kid wanting to airbrush their Acne.

I think piracy laws, like almost every law in the modern developed world, is far too black and white for the broad range of circumstances it is applied to.

 

[gingerheid]

I'd say it's morally acceptable if you make all efforts to get your hands on it now, and if failing that you buy it when it does come out here.

 

[Aussie_Rail]

What's the song called?

If you know someone in one of those places it was released in, could you ask them to send it to you?

If you download it in a legal way and no one is worse off from it, then I don't see any problem there and you should not feel bad about it.

Sometimes Australia is usually last to get new stuff, and it's quite common that people who travel overseas get it and bring it back rather than wait ages for it.

If you download it illegally now, but you buy it later when its possible then I guess morally it would feel right so you could do that, or you could donate the monetary value of it to a charity of your choice?

 

[EM2]

However, I do not have any qualms about pirating music, software or anything else produced by a company or artist who is either dead or no longer in the business. If you buy a CD for instance of a dead artist, you're just giving money to the record companies;

Er, no. The performer, writer and publisher still have rights to that music and any royalties they are due goes to their estate. That's why Elvis still makes millions every year.
And the same goes for 'no longer in the business'. A lot of musicians stop recording and gigging, but they are still entitled to their royalties from their previous work.

 

[JustinStacey.x]

Er, no. The performer, writer and publisher still have rights to that music and any royalties they are due goes to their estate. That's why Elvis still makes millions every year.
And the same goes for 'no longer in the business'. A lot of musicians stop recording and gigging, but they are still entitled to their royalties from their previous work.

Are you for real? The second part of your post I'll accept, but the first? Elvis is dead, mate - in case you weren't aware.

 

[Oswyntail]

Are you for real? The second part of your post I'll accept, but the first? Elvis is dead, mate - in case you weren't aware.

Yes, but his "estate" is a legal entity that has the rights to income. Simple fact.
As to the OP, you use the word "illegal" and you ask the question. To my mind that suggests that you know what you are suggesting is (within your moral vision) morally wrong (which was your question). So what's wrong with waiting?

 

[HSTfan!!!]

I quite often download things "illegally" before uk release dates, but for the most part I will go out and buy it when it's released.

 

[JustinStacey.x]

Yes, but his "estate" is a legal entity that has the rights to income. Simple fact.
As to the OP, you use the word "illegal" and you ask the question. To my mind that suggests that you know what you are suggesting is (within your moral vision) morally wrong (which was your question). So what's wrong with waiting?

Fair enough.

 

[GB]

If a song that you really want (and is being played on the radio) was released in the USA in July, the rest of Europe in mid-August but is not out in the UK until the last week of October, is it moral to illegally download it.

What you purpose is no different to someone ordering a DVD online that has not been released in the UK yet (I do it all the time) or someone on holiday bringing back an item that is yet to see a release date here.

Providing you have paid for it, there is no moral or legal issue in my opinion.

Where it gets dodgy is downloading something from unofficial sources (without paying), even if you plan to buy it at a later date.

I would say it is perfectly acceptable to download it from an unauthorised source. I refuse to call this an "illegal download", as it has yet to be established legally that downloading music for personal use is against the law

Should I go out and steal a car then if its for my own personal use???. Anyone with half a brain cell can see that downloading copyrighted material from unauthorised sources such as file share websites/programs is illegal and wrong...whether or not someone has offically been "done" for it.

 

[mrcheek]

Should I go out and steal a car then if its for my own personal use???. Anyone with half a brain cell can see that downloading copyrighted material from unauthorised sources such as file share websites/programs is illegal and wrong...whether or not someone has offically been "done" for it.

Stealing a car falls under the definition of theft ("Dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it").

Copyright materials are totally different. The law allows exceptions for "fair use", and it has yet to be legally established as to how far that "fair use" may extend. An individual downloading a song for his own personal use, if he does not copy it further, or seek to profit from it, is, in my view, committing no offence. It has never been established that such acts are illegal (note, it has never been established that such actions are legal either, as the courts have yet to rule on this specific point!). Whether or not it is wrong is largely a question of morality. But, the fact that the piece of music in question is not legally available to the user is highly relevant.

GB, since you obviously lack the requisite half a brain cell, please try not to get involved in complex legal discussions that even the finest legal minds in the world cant agree on!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I just had an idea!!!!

Mojo, why not download the track from youtube? That way, the version you have will be of lesser quality. You will still be able to listen to and enjoy the song, but when its released, you will still want to buy it in its proper form, so that you have a decent quality version. You get your music, the band get their royalties when you buy the proper version, and everybody is happy.
Morally speaking, I think God himself would be proud of that one....

 

[GB]

The 1988 Copy Right Act makes no mention of "Fair Use". It does however mention "Fair Dealings" which is appears different.

GB, since you obviously lack the requisite half a brain cell, please try not to get involved in complex legal discussions that even the finest legal minds in the world cant agree on

No need to get personal :roll: I never claimed to be fully trained in law.

I would say it is perfectly acceptable to download it from an unauthorised source. I refuse to call this an "illegal download", as it has yet to be established legally that downloading music for personal use is against the law

Hang on a minute, you have just told me to "not to get involved in complex legal discussions that even the finest legal minds in the world cant agree on". So what makes you anymore right or wrong than me??

You may not call it illegal (thats your opinion) but logic and common sense say otherwise.

Stealing a car falls under the definition of theft

It may well be defined differently, but it effectivly amounts to the same thing.

 

[EM2]

Are you for real? The second part of your post I'll accept, but the first? Elvis is dead, mate - in case you weren't aware.

He might be dead, but he still earned $49million in 2006.
http://www.forbes.com/2007/10/26/top-dead-celebrity-biz-media-deadcelebs07-cz_lg_1029celeb.html

 

[mrcheek]

You may not call it illegal (thats your opinion) but logic and common sense say otherwise.

Since when have logic and common sense had anything to do with the law?

Apparently, reciprocal babysitting arrangements are against the law if you are not registered. No common sense there!

Many years ago, a similar situation arose over bootlegs videos and DVDs. the authorities tried to convince us that buying them was illegal. On legal advice, the government later changed their tune, no longer calling it illegal, but trying to convince us it was simply wrong to do so. Hence the rather clever "Knock off Nigel" adverts. Peer pressure is often the best deterrent. I wonder how many people have been put off buying bootleg DVDs simply because someone started singing the Knock off Nigel song at them.....

Im not fully trained in law, and havent studied it since graduating over 14 years ago. But I felt I needed to put my views forward because I know far more about law than the average person. I felt the situation needed correcting.

Lawyers acting for the major record companies know they are on shaky ground as well, as they have tended to be very selective in who they target with legal actions.

 

[GB]

Since when have logic and common sense had anything to do with the law?

Point taken