Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
Buckwheat
Posts: 956
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Buckwheat » Sat Mar 23, 2013 3:42 am

BlackBird wrote:As an interesting footnote to discussion on the 2nd Parajika - It isn't a parajika unless the theft is of something of value above 1/24th a troy ounce of gold. Which would be ~ $67 USD. So anything over $67 and you're no longer a monk. I'm not sure if this is used in practice however.
So your saying I can steal that $50 jacket I've been longing for? :thanks: :tongue: Just kidding. :anjali:
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.

User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 1928
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by BlackBird » Sat Mar 23, 2013 5:50 am

Buckwheat wrote:
BlackBird wrote:As an interesting footnote to discussion on the 2nd Parajika - It isn't a parajika unless the theft is of something of value above 1/24th a troy ounce of gold. Which would be ~ $67 USD. So anything over $67 and you're no longer a monk. I'm not sure if this is used in practice however.
So your saying I can steal that $50 jacket I've been longing for? :thanks: :tongue: Just kidding. :anjali:
As long as it's a shade of orangey brown. ;)
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

K.Dhamma
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 5:50 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by K.Dhamma » Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:18 pm

It's hard to say. I like to draw up analogies when things like this occur.

Your neighbor has an apple tree. You buy an apple from him. Seeds and all. Instead of throwing out the seeds you plant the seeds and in 5 years you have an apple tree of your own. You decide to give away your apples instead of sell them to anyone. So your neighbor doesn't get any money anymore from his apples because you used HIS apple seeds to grow your own tree.

Does this make it right? Depends on whether there was an known or even unmentioned agreement that you wouldn't use the seeds to put him out of business.

When you give away a CD or DVD was it because you felt compelled to let others enjoy the fruits of your labor/money? Was it to make the other person lose money because CD's and DVD's cost too much these days?

Are you looking for the CD or DVD online because you choose not to spend money to get it? Doesn't that err on the side of greediness? Are you under the assumption that the person offering it was giving it to you specifically? Are you the intended receiver?
Lots of questions.
I feel that anymore most people tend to ebb on the side of giving away because they don't want others to have to spend money. Then again, I can't read minds so I cannot conclude this absolutely.

I think it comes down to intention. On both the receiving side and giving side. If your intentions are deceitful, then yes it is an infraction. If a friend gives you a CD or DVD that is burned or allows you to copy it from his computer because he knows you really enjoy that particular one and gives it to you freely without asking for anything in return then I suppose it doesn't violate it. Again, I am a layperson and this is just my input. This is a rather interesting conversation though.


Just a footnote: Put it into context of a virtue. Sometimes that sheds some light on the truth of things.
"Remember you dont meditate to get anything, but to get rid of things. We do it, not with desire, but with letting go. If you want anything, you wont find it." - Ajahn Chah

Dennenappelmoes
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:34 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Dennenappelmoes » Fri Apr 26, 2013 7:23 pm

It is a violation if you agree that it is indeed illegal. You do not necessarily have to agree with the laws of your particular country.

For example, the Eightfold Path's notion of "sexual misconduct" is deliberately not specified in detail, as what is considered "misconduct" varies from society to society. For example, in some society it is accepted to have multiple wives, whereby sleeping with another woman does not cause suffering, whereas in another society it does.

I think the true wisdom in all Buddhist precepts and advices lies in the very fact they are open to and welcoming your own honest interpretation.

To say that "illegal downloading" violates the precept per se does not make any sense. Whether or not this is deemed illegal and/or punishable (and maybe there are other qualifications than just these two as well) chances from one government to the next. This would mean that one year you violate a precept and the next year you don't. Don't look to governments, to capitalism, or whatever other system that tries to tell you what to to. Mind you, it has taken a whole lot of breaking precepts to come up with this whole copyright philosophy in the first place.

Is it a violation if a researcher can save millions of lives developing a new drug but violates a patent? Only if the researcher sincerely believes in the patent system. Be true to your own heart. Don't you think that is what the Buddha would have wanted for you as well? :namaste:

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16452
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Apr 26, 2013 9:42 pm

Dennenappelmoes wrote: Is it a violation if a researcher can save millions of lives developing a new drug but violates a patent?
Perhaps a little off topic, but a patent doesn't stop people from using the knowledge. In fact, the point of the patent system is that a patent discloses the knowledge so that others can use it. There is nothing to stop the researcher from developing a new drug using a patented process. It's in the selling of the drug where the patent issue would arise (and there would have to be negotiations over how much of the profit the patent-holder would receive).

:anjali:
Mike

Dennenappelmoes
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:34 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Dennenappelmoes » Fri Apr 26, 2013 10:33 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Dennenappelmoes wrote: Is it a violation if a researcher can save millions of lives developing a new drug but violates a patent?
Perhaps a little off topic, but a patent doesn't stop people from using the knowledge. In fact, the point of the patent system is that a patent discloses the knowledge so that others can use it. There is nothing to stop the researcher from developing a new drug using a patented process. It's in the selling of the drug where the patent issue would arise (and there would have to be negotiations over how much of the profit the patent-holder would receive).

:anjali:
Mike
There was a documentary about all of this, the whole copyright issue, I forgot what it was called. It was very interesting and at some point it provided a very compelling story about how many lives could have been saved had the system been different, and how the system only benefits those at the top and turns the rest of society into 'criminals'. I really can't put forth any good arguments or summary here, I'm not an expert, just thought I'd mention it because documentaries like these can really change your opinion on government policy around. I know it did for me. I guess this will always be a difficult issue, as a Buddhist you'll probably want to know if there is "suffering" on behalf of the artist or whether downloading actually benefits the artist, and with all people, publishers, media companies and lobbies involved in this system it is quite difficult to determine. Reminds me of fish in the ocean dying because of some types of shampoo: Somtimes it is just beyond our ability to fully understand what our choices actually cause..

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16452
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Apr 26, 2013 10:55 pm

Hi Dennenappelmoes,

I wasn't saying that the current Patent system doesn't have all kinds of of problems. It obviously does stifle development of useful commercial products in many cases.

However, I think it's misleading to confuse laws on illegal downloading, etc (which prohibit you from obtaining copies of copyrighted you have not paid for), and the Patent system, which allows you free access to the patented idea, but says that you have to share any profit you make from using that information. I'm free to build something based on a patented idea (but not necessarily to profit from it).

:anjali:
MIke

Digity
Posts: 1375
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:13 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Digity » Sat Apr 27, 2013 12:33 am

Part of the reason I stopped downloading illegal stuff was because most of the stuff I downloaded was for entertainment purposes and served to be a big distraction in my life. Maybe that alone is enough of a reason to stop for some.

5heaps
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:19 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by 5heaps » Sat Apr 27, 2013 11:51 am

no illegal downloading does not. poor people must have access to that material as well. if they do not and are forced to download it illegally, then this is only because government has failed to procure relevant taxes to enable universal access.
A Japanese man has been arrested on suspicion of writing a computer virus that destroys and replaces files on a victim PC with manga images of squid, octopuses and sea urchins. Masato Nakatsuji, 27, of Izumisano, Osaka Prefecture, was quoted as telling police: "I wanted to see how much my computer programming skills had improved since the last time I was arrested."

Coyote
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:42 pm
Location: Wales - UK

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Coyote » Sat Apr 27, 2013 6:08 pm

5heaps wrote:no illegal downloading does not. poor people must have access to that material as well. if they do not and are forced to download it illegally, then this is only because government has failed to procure relevant taxes to enable universal access.
What, exactly, is so necessary about these materials that people are forced to download illegally unless the government pays for them?
"If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving & sharing, they would not eat without having given, nor would the stain of miserliness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite, their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared."
Iti 26

5heaps
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:19 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by 5heaps » Mon Apr 29, 2013 11:05 am

Coyote wrote:
5heaps wrote:no illegal downloading does not. poor people must have access to that material as well. if they do not and are forced to download it illegally, then this is only because government has failed to procure relevant taxes to enable universal access.
What, exactly, is so necessary about these materials that people are forced to download illegally unless the government pays for them?
without attractive sense objects it is not possible for a desire realm mind to experience happiness. this is one of the main reasons that practitioners renounce the desire realm and aim for form realm jhana--with jhana, happiness and other such positive mental factors utterly do not depend on the stimulus of external objects or circumstance . no family, no dogs, you do not even really need your own eyeballs if you happen to have a caretaker.

a good movie or a good book are among the best of attractive sense objects.
A Japanese man has been arrested on suspicion of writing a computer virus that destroys and replaces files on a victim PC with manga images of squid, octopuses and sea urchins. Masato Nakatsuji, 27, of Izumisano, Osaka Prefecture, was quoted as telling police: "I wanted to see how much my computer programming skills had improved since the last time I was arrested."

Tom
Posts: 288
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 9:50 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by Tom » Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:19 pm

5heaps wrote:without attractive sense objects it is not possible for a desire realm mind to experience happiness.
Where is this concept found?

duckfiasco
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 8:37 pm

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by duckfiasco » Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:50 pm

A minor example compared to some being discussed here.

My partner is an electronic musician. The moment a new album of his comes out, sometimes before, people have already started sharing it illegally online.
Would every single one of these people have paid for the music? Unlikely.
Would some have, and by not doing so, are deliberately avoiding paying for another's time and effort? I think so.

My partner does not give all of his music out freely (some yes).
Therefore people sharing it freely are doing so against his wishes, the "owner," and likely with the intention of self-interest.
I would be surprised if any person sharing his music genuinely believes he would want that done.
So we have several unwholesome intentions going at once, even if they're subtle.
And isn't this the primary source of dark kamma anyway?

For these reasons, I think illegal downloading is an example of violating the second precept.
Sorry if this has already been said.

daimond
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 2:56 am

Re: Does illegal downloading violate the 2nd precept?

Post by daimond » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:19 pm

In Buddhisme there Dhammapanatti a law been create togather like time, measurement, number etc.

in this law actualy there copyrigth law, example a book have copyright time, limit time regulary like 75 years after the author dies, and after 75 years the book would become public domain but this kind law be broken by the goverment and company greedy.

They create perpetual copyright (continuing copyright) so in the end this kind book would never become public domain, cause of these create chaos as we see right now.

what we see right now are result of the broken dhammapanatti in copyright laws, and the nature react to it.

daimond
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 2:56 am

Ernest Hemingway Book.

Post by daimond » Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:18 am

I am sorry i made a mistake falseing or mix with usa and europe copyright law. (+70)

International law
+50 years after the author die.

example:
Ernest Hemingway books he died in 1961 +50 yr= 2011 so that end the copyright law, the ernest hemingway books it is aviable to public domain in 2012.

[quote]
Enters Public Domain in
Canada Sunday January 01, 2012
New Year's Day now marks public domain day, the day when new works enter into the public domain.

While Europe marks the entry of James Joyce into its public domain, Joyce has been in the public domain in Canada for the past 20 years, serving as an important reminder of the implications of the term of copyright. In Canada, the term is
life of the author plus 50 years, consistent with international law. In the U.S. and Europe, the term exceeds international requirements by adding an additional 20 years, meaning many works take two more decades to enter the public domain.

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6215/125/



this quote from wikipedia

Copyright Term Extension

(Walt disney protection Act)

The Walt Disney Company lobbied extensively on behalf of the Act, which delayed the entry into the public domain of the earliest Mickey Mouse movies, leading to the nickname "The Mickey Mouse Protection Act". In addition to Disney, California congresswoman Mary Bono ( Sonny Bono 's widow and Congressional successor), and the estate of composer George Gershwin supported the act. Mary Bono, speaking on the floor of the United States House of Representatives , said:

Actually, Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever. I am informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution . ... As you know, there is also [then- MPAA president] Jack Valenti 's proposal for term to last forever less one day. Perhaps the Committee may look at that next Congress.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyrigh ... ension_Act

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests