Details on Stealing

A forum for discussion of Buddhist ethics.
zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Tue May 31, 2016 11:58 pm

The key here is "permission". Libraries have the permission of the authors to lend their books. Youtube in many cases do not the permission to distribute the intellectual properties.

Therefore, you cannot compare libraries with youtube. It's such an absurd comparison.
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 12:39 am

zengen wrote:The key here is "permission". Libraries have the permission of the authors to lend their books. Youtube in many cases do not the permission to distribute the intellectual properties.
Please pay attention to what I and others have metnioned multiple times: 1)copyrighted material can be removed from youtube, 2) many artists choose not to have it removed
Therefore, you cannot compare libraries with youtube. It's such an absurd comparison.
you are really just stalling because your argument makes no sense, and accuses people of breaking the Second Precept based on literally using a freely available service, the operation of which they have no real say over. You have so far not one good argument in favor of the idea that it is "stealing" other than some platitudes that could have come straight from the RIAA or MPAA.
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

User avatar
Karma Dorje
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Karma Dorje » Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:59 am

zengen wrote:
Karma Dorje wrote:You cant deprive someone of something they do not possess. Future earnings are something that does not exist yet hence they can't be stolen.
You can deprive someone of the opportunity. That is still a wrong deed.
That is ludicrous. If I never intend to buy a book and copy it instead then it does not deprive the author of any opportunity as they would never get any money from me anyway. By your own logic then, that is not stealing. Your own statements lead to absurd contradictions.

There is no precedent for considering threatening future earnings to breach the second precept. None. It's just your own personal opinion, and you aren't a Buddhist teacher. You can make other moral claims about copying, streaming and filesharing but they are not stealing as defined in the Buddhist teachings.
"Although my view is higher than the sky, My respect for the cause and effect of actions is as fine as grains of flour."
-Padmasambhava

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 18214
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Grigoris » Wed Jun 01, 2016 1:43 pm

zengen wrote:Ask yourself, what would be the incentive?
Free advertising for their "product". It's a trade off: lose some revenue to people who will download, listen and watch without paying, win some revenue from the people who will hear of your product via the medium.

It is why most artists that do post (or allow their stuff to be posted) to youtube, do so at a low quality/bit rate. If you like what you hear and want the quality product, you then go off and buy it.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:25 pm

Karma Dorje wrote: That is ludicrous. If I never intend to buy a book and copy it instead then it does not deprive the author of any opportunity as they would never get any money from me anyway.
If you copy the whole book so you don't have to buy the book, that is stealing. Your intention is to not pay for the book, but own it anyway.
Karma Dorje wrote:You can make other moral claims about copying, streaming and filesharing but they are not stealing as defined in the Buddhist teachings.
I would be very careful with streaming and filesharing. Often times, it is stealing. People just aren't aware.
Last edited by zengen on Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:30 pm

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Please pay attention to what I and others have metnioned multiple times: 1)copyrighted material can be removed from youtube, 2) many artists choose not to have it removed
There are artists who aren't even aware that their works are posted on youtube, or other websites against their will. What can you do about this?
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:46 pm

zengen wrote:
Karma Dorje wrote: That is ludicrous. If I never intend to buy a book and copy it instead then it does not deprive the author of any opportunity as they would never get any money from me anyway.
If you copy the whole book so you don't have to buy the book, that is stealing. Your intention is to not pay for the book, but own it anyway.
Karma Dorje wrote:You can make other moral claims about copying, streaming and filesharing but they are not stealing as defined in the Buddhist teachings.
I would be very careful with streaming and filesharing. Often times, it is stealing. People just aren't aware.
Geez, learn some basic Dharma, if people aren't aware, then it isn't 'stealing' in the Second Precept sense, which requires volition.
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:48 pm

zengen wrote:
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Please pay attention to what I and others have metnioned multiple times: 1)copyrighted material can be removed from youtube, 2) many artists choose not to have it removed
There are artists who aren't even aware that their works are posted on youtube, or other websites against their will. What can you do about this?
Again you are focusing on a non-issue, and seem to not grasp the basic idea that 'stealing' in a Buddhist sense requires an intent to actually steal...
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:50 pm

Johnny Dangerous wrote: you are really just stalling because your argument makes no sense, and accuses people of breaking the Second Precept based on literally using a freely available service, the operation of which they have no real say over. You have so far not one good argument in favor of the idea that it is "stealing" other than some platitudes that could have come straight from the RIAA or MPAA.
I challenge your comparison of youtube with the public library because people reading your posts will be misled into believing that it is morally correct to watch all videos posted on youtube, which is incorrect since not all videos posted on youtube are granted permissions from their authors.
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:09 pm

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Geez, learn some basic Dharma, if people aren't aware, then it isn't 'stealing' in the Second Precept sense, which requires volition.
Let's not talk about violating precept. Just karma.

So if I steal something without being aware of it, I did not commit negative karma? If I committed a wrong deed without knowing that it was a wrong deed, I am free of karma?
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:17 pm

zengen wrote:
Johnny Dangerous wrote: you are really just stalling because your argument makes no sense, and accuses people of breaking the Second Precept based on literally using a freely available service, the operation of which they have no real say over. You have so far not one good argument in favor of the idea that it is "stealing" other than some platitudes that could have come straight from the RIAA or MPAA.
I challenge your comparison of youtube with the public library because people reading your posts will be misled into believing that it is morally correct to watch all videos posted on youtube, which is incorrect since not all videos posted on youtube are granted permissions from their authors.
ANd the authors can get them taken down..again though, you are still avoiding the point of whether or not it constitutes stealing according to the 2nd precept, and so far have no evidence whatsoever that it does.
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:20 pm

zengen wrote:
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Geez, learn some basic Dharma, if people aren't aware, then it isn't 'stealing' in the Second Precept sense, which requires volition.
Let's not talk about violating precept. Just karma.

So if I steal something without being aware of it, I did not commit negative karma? If I committed a wrong deed without knowing that it was a wrong deed, I am free of karma?

Let's not talk about violating precept. Just karma.
What on earth does that mean?

Violating precepts relates directly to Karma, as doing so means doing acts that lead to negative karma.. Violating precepts requires an intention to do the acts.

And yes, if you smash a bug with your car unknowingly it is not the same thing as intentionally killing a bug.
Last edited by Johnny Dangerous on Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:20 pm

Johnny Dangerous wrote: ANd the authors can get them taken down..again though, you are still avoiding the point of whether or not it constitutes stealing according to the 2nd precept, and so far have no evidence whatsoever that it does.
No, I don't accept your comparison of youtube to public library. People reading your post will treat youtube like a public library), where they think they have the right to access all contents. Do you see how ridiculous this comparison is?
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:24 pm

zengen wrote:
Johnny Dangerous wrote: ANd the authors can get them taken down..again though, you are still avoiding the point of whether or not it constitutes stealing according to the 2nd precept, and so far have no evidence whatsoever that it does.
No, I don't accept your comparison of youtube to public library. People reading your post will treat youtube like a public library), where they think they have the right to access all contents. Do you see how ridiculous this comparison is?
People already treat youtube, and most of the internet like that. Are you capable of something other than just repeating that you think it's ridiculous? Nearly ready to give up on this, you are making no points whatsoever, and seem to lack a basic understanding of Buddhist ethics that would inform this debate enough to get somewhere.
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:27 pm

Without intention, negative karma can still be created. That was my point. People reading your post will be misled into believing that no negative karma is created if a wrong deed is done without intention.
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:28 pm

zengen wrote:Without intention, negative karma can still be created. That was my point. People reading your post will be misled into believing that no negative karma is created if a wrong deed is done without intention.


"Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect."

— AN 6.63
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:32 pm

So let say a person streams a movie illegally on some random website, without knowing that it is stealing and without the intention to steal, the person did not commit negative karma?
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:34 pm

zengen wrote:So let say a person streams a movie illegally on some random website, without knowing that it is stealing and without the intention to steal, the person did not commit negative karma?

By my understanding no, they didn't, none at all. Intention is the vital part of karma. In that case, it would basically be a neutral action I believe. That's without even addressing the spurious claim that it is "stealing" in the first place.
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

zengen
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 1:38 am
Location: human realm

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by zengen » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:44 pm

Say I'm a sales person. I'm not aware that my product is harmful to others, but I still sell it. By your reasoning, I did not create negative karma.
There is no meaning to cyclic existence.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 8436
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Details on Stealing

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:45 pm

zengen wrote:Say I'm a sales person. I'm not aware that my product is harmful to others, but I still sell it. By your reasoning, I did not create negative karma.

AFAIK this is correct yes, Karma requires some kind of intention, otherwise it is not karma...on your part at least, though you could surmise that all that happens to people is a fruition of their karma - the important part for us is our intentions. The kind of thing you are talking about is more like the Jain version of Karma, which is very different.
Last edited by Johnny Dangerous on Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”

-Jeff H.

Post Reply

Return to “Ethical Conduct”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests