Here goes:
Here's a thought experiment A singer invests many hours and tens of thousands of dollars in releasing an album to the public. (Let's keep it simple and not talk about anyone else invested in the project; producer, distributor, etc.) Let's also grant the premise that halachicly, it is permissible to copy the music without payment (It isn't.) Is Greenberg really intending to argue that according to the Torah/Halacha it is "mentshlach" for everyone to copy the music, resulting in the artist losing his entire investment? That's the position he takes. He calls it halacha. I call it unethical. I think reasonable people would find his view unfair. Note: even according to Greenberg's representation of halacha, the halacha does not mandate duplicating software or music without paying. His insistence on advocating doing so is enlightening.Sorry, but thats not a good enough reason. While I may feel bad for the producers, it still doesn't change the basics.
The Chazon Ish writes something about "our" common sense. One who comes in to a small town that currently has only one older teacher for children, and this newcomer, a young man, offers his services and thereby entirely takes away the livelihood of the other. Our sense would tell us that this man is a rasha. Yet, the Chazon Ish writes that according to the Torah precept of "kinas chachom tarbeh chochmah', it is wholly within his right to do so. (I think he should possibly be encouraged as well.) Therefore, writes the Chazon Ish, we should look to the Torah for proper ethics, NOT what the street decides.
Mentchlichkeit is to be dictated by the Torah. And please stop saying that it isn't permissible to copy music. Minimally, according to Blog In DM, it is most of the poskim. There's no need to distort.
And yes, according to these poskim I refer to, Halachah does indeed allow copying music and software without paying. Yes, enlightening.
In his post, Greenberg wrote "because wrote dina d'malchusa dina is irrelevant." He's now backtracking slightly.I'm not backtracking. It was my original intent. I'm sorry if it was misunderstood. Note the example given there. That example is meant to convey the reason why I think its not applicable here.
The reality is that that normative halacha accepts dina d'malchusa as binding. Any assertion to the contrary is ignorant. We rely on it in many daily cases, including for such serious issues as determining halachik yichus. Yesterday, I asked a prominent Chareidi rav if there were any major poskim who hold that dina d'malchusa dina doesn't apply today. He couldn't name one.I totally agree. But I think all will agree that it doesn't apply in every case. This is one of them.
There is one rabbi in Brooklyn, NY who allows copying CD's, software etc. He also allows cheating on taxes. Draw your own conclusions. The RCA did when it stopped using him as posek when those views became a matter of public record.This is not the Rabbi I am referring to. Stop using his as a punching bag. The Rabbis I refer to are very well known chareidim; gedolim and other dayanim.
Also, "free music" is a compelling reason not to follow civil law? Compelling? Really now?Compelling when said law is not being enforced.
Yosef takes issue with my characterization of permitting illegal downloading as an "obvious chilul Hashem". His proof, many people do it. That's just because they can do it without anyone seeing. (They think). During blackouts, many people loot. Does that make it ok? Personally, I believe that Frum Jews ought to live by a higher standard.It is considered normatively moral to download music in the blogosphere. It is not considered moral to loot.
Yes, the notoriously powerful and influential Chareidi Jewish music industry has intimidated rabbonim, making them afraid to voice their opinions. They are also afraid to ever ban CD's or concerts, set limits on band sizes allowed at weddings, criticize popular Jewish music styles as inappropriate.... oh, wait!No. The rabbinic establishment has little impetus to encourage copying. Why should they? In all cases above, the Rabbonim saw benefit in publicizing their views. I don't see them here. (True, I arguing a little different here, but the point remains.)
Actually, Yosef, it's a matter of public record. Incidentally, I would point out that even according to this rabbi, violating US law is only permissible if you are certain won't be caught, because if people know about it, it would be a Chilul Hashem and forbidden. Publicly advocating violating the law, as you did in your post, constitutes a Chilul Hashem too. This rabbi was careful to express his views only on Shabbos or in personal conversations where it wouldn't be recorded/ written about. He was careful to never state this view in situations where a reporter/recorder might be present.True. What I clearly articulated was that the lie was that you bunched all of the rabbonim under this 'disgraced' Rabbi. Thats a lie.
In my post, I challenged Yosef to post the links to the pirate sites. The reason I did so is simple. Posting links to pirated music is illegal and would be a violation of the terms of service at all reputable web hosts in this country. I'd like to see him address the legal issues in maintaining his site, were he to do so and a complaint was filed.You know very well that I could give detailed instruction how to find said sites without resorting to links.
Um, if there's nothing wrong with it, why would it reduce his credibility?Because then I have an incentive to argue wrongly. This way I'm writing objectively. By making your assertion, you're implying that I'm nogai'a bedavar.
To paraphrase BlogInDM: Bottom line, BlogInDM's logic is faulty. Just because something is morally wrong according to your narrow view does not mean it's ethical or right.
Ever hear of "naval birshus hatorah?Yes. And how does that apply here? (Answer: Not at all.)
"Vasisa hayashar vehatov?"Yashar and tov according to you're narrow view. Halachah decides yashar and tov.
In this case, he is wrong because it's not even halachikly permissible.It is.
Greenberg claim that "many, if not most, poskim permit copying software and music etc., even for others" conveys the impression that a significant number of poskim, if not the majority, hold this view. This is false.It is true.
It also constitutes a Chillul Hashem.So you'd rather claim the opposite of halachah in order not to make a chillul Hashem? Guess what? It isn't, as shown above.
You're take?
9 comments:
A common psak that i am aware of, and some poskim say this or similar logic only privately - very few publicize they hold this), is that it is assur to copy a cd, but it is muttar to download from the internet. Once something is available o the internet, there is automatic yi'ush, and the item is hefker, like something that was thrown into the sea - even if it washes up later and is found, the owner gave up all hope knowing it was out to sea.
I don't see how this can be divorced from the larger issue of how people get their music these days. There's not going to be special treatment for frum artists; appeals to halacha and so forth mirror the recording industry's righteous anger, but ultimately they had little legal recourse and had to work out alternate solutions. It just so happens that what you could do 10 years ago -- record and album, press a cd, and sell it and count your money -- isn't how you can do it now.
Let me give a moshol: many years ago a little boy was bullied. He counted the days until his graduation from 8th grade. He knew he'd be going to a different mesivta, and besides, it was much more yeshivish. The significance of that? Well, bullying is obviously assur. Surely all the be-hatted bochurim simply could not bully this boy, since they would be so frum. Turned out this boy was living in a dream world. The way to address bullying is not by appealing to halacha and frumkeit. Bullying is simply a reality, and it must be managed however such management can be accomplished. Same with downloading music. If kids are socialized to avoid turning lights on and off on shabbos from the time they're small children, they're not socialized not to download music. On the contrary, if anything they're socialized that it's perfectly fine, along with the rest of the world who downloads music and videos. Only some kind of itunes like solution (make it easier and attractive and cheap) can work, and frum artists will simply have to get used to it same as other artists.
Physical CD's are history. "Downloading" music, buying digital music to download to your digital music player is simply the way not only is it going to be done, but is already being done in the non-Jewish world. In another few years purchased CD's will be as rare as buying cassettes nowadays (yes, it's still being sold in the Jewish world here and there).
So to say one form is ok and another isn't...the artists and the halacha is going to have to shift quickly with the technology.
Blog in Dm responded to my comment above. Since I can't comment there, here is my response:
>Actually, contemporary Jewish releases are available easily, attractively, and cheap, just like he asserts in his closing sentence.
I didn't say "easy." I said "easier." The reason why itunes worked is because a critical mass of people discovered that it was much easier for them spend $.99 a tune, $10 an album on itunes (which synced with their ipods) than it was to use Kazaa. This happened early enough that torrents weren't much of a factor yet. But while many people found that itunes was easy enough, comprehensive enough and cheap enough to justify paying for music again, countless others gravitated toward torrents and sharing software like soulseek. In other words, the market split. Instead of the situation as before, where most people downloaded for free, now a lot of people were willing to pay. But the recording industry still had to make do with selling less. That's just how it is.
If your contention is that mostlymusic.com or whatever is easier, cheaper and better than free downloads (why they decided that Jewish songs are worth $.50 more than the Rolling Stones is a great question; Apple established that $.99 is the reasonable price point) that clearly is not the case, or else there wouldn't be this mass downloading which we see. Itunes isn't cheap, easy and attractive because Apple says it is. It's cheap, easy and attractive because the customers say it is. And despite all that, many music lovers will still never pay a penny for a song. For better or worse new times defined what a song is worth to consumers of music, and that's free to $.99. Economics apply even to frum people.
So can I also decide on my own the value of a car and then just break into dealership and take it and leave a 20 dollar bill on the counter?
I'm very curious what you do for a living and how you provide for you family. I'd like to see what you think if one day someone decides the value of your service can be determined by whatever dollar amount the customer decides and then we will see how you survive.
Shame.
Yanky wrote the reason for the heter of ripping music of the Internet is since wee dealing with yiush, I've heard once a different reason for the heter because it's not sold btnay or perpetually leased whatever u call it.
>So can I also decide on my own the value of a car and then just break into dealership and take it and leave a 20 dollar bill on the counter?
No, but if 8 gazillion people decide that cars are worth $20 then one of two things can happen: no more cars, or, somehow people figure out a way to make and sell them for $20.
It may not be nice, but it also wasn't nice when blacksmiths and whipmakers went out of business. You simply cannot guilt a critical mass of people into sustaining your obsolete business model. You may be right, but that won't sell your cds.
Yanky Friedman,
That yi'ush might likely make it muttar to copy from a CD as well, since the producers know that its inevitable.
Anonymous (1),
True. Possibly the best way to combat it partially is to make it convenient and easy to download when paying, making it a value proposition.
Akiva,
Ditto. See what I answered anon1. But the discussion here was for these who are yera'im veshlaimim.
Anonymous 1,
True again. But like I said, not a good halachik response, like the next anon posits.
Jeff,
Most albums dont use this gimmick. But the reason cited above applies here as well. Even with this "trick", download would still be muttar.
B"H
And despite all that, many music lovers will still never pay a penny for a song. For better or worse new times defined what a song is worth to consumers of music, and that's free to $.99. Economics apply even to frum people.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010 10:43:00 PM
Economics describe how things generally work in the world. Torah describes how they should be...
Post a Comment