The arguments about downloading often implicate moral questions of right and wrong. While there are legal issues, for many, the question of morality must precede the legal issues. So, that being said, let’s consider the actions of the person many believe to be the ultimate moral authority, Jesus. So, WWJD? Let’s consider what He did in order to answer that question.

Downloading or digital copying is the process of converting a less valuable thing into something of value. In this case, the raw magnetic or optical disk, owned by the one performing the copy operation, is converted into music or other multi-media normally produced by someone else. So, the argument goes, that if you copy the file and convert your disk to that which is commercially produced, you have deprived the creator of the original his/her livelihood.

In John Chapter 2, Jesus performs his first miracle, converting water into wine. He converted a basically worthless commodity, water, into valuable wine which normally takes many months and hard labor to create. Jesus short cut this process and created wine without the aid of the local wine industry. Did Jesus worry about the harm to the local wine economy? No. Did He say he should compensate the wine industry for their loss of sales that day? No. What about the poor local wine distributor? Did He say there was anything wrong with creating wine from water, wine that was better than that created in the local region? No. However, the party in Cana, appears to have been very large and the lost sale must have been great.

In the Gospel of Mark we see Jesus replicating loaves and fish. According to Mark Chapter 6 and Chapter 8, He did this on at least two occasions. In the first case, He distributed enough replicated bread and fish to feed over 5000 people, in the second, over 4000. In both cases, He fed the multitude with many baskets left over. Did He consider the lost sales of the local bakers? Did He mention the loss to the local fishing industry that day? Did He mention that this was stealing? No. However, in feeding over 9,000 people, there had to be a huge impact, if you believe the current arguments in the Copyright industry.

Based on the actions of Jesus, it is clear that He did not buy the arguments being made today. It is clear that replication or conversion of something you own to something someone else normally makes, is not morally wrong. Now, the law must catch up to His teachings.

I believe we already had this conversation a month ago, but since I'm the first here I have to post.

He'd break the CD's in 2.

I'm surprised the WIJ (Wine Industry of Jerusalem) & the F&LA (Fish & Loaves Association) didn't immediately sue Jesus for infringement & seek damages.

At the same time, they'd have Pontius Pilate (sp?) pass a law making it illegal to obtain wine, fish, or loaves from any source other than an officially licensed dealer, including illegal fishing, grape growing, or baking & exchange of goods by end-users.

Thou shalt seek out, or produce music out of thin air....go forth and mutlitply...

"I'm surprised the WIJ (Wine Industry of Jerusalem) & the F&LA (Fish & Loaves Association) didn't immediately sue Jesus for infringement & seek damages."

...uh, they DID

(Why do you think he was crucified?)

Hate to break it to ya all, but Jesus was "Open Source."

Shmoo,
I will burn in hell with glee if I am wrong!

Andrea is ALIVE!

(Thank you Jesus!)

Folks, you don't know what I have just been thru. I won't tell any personal life details here, but be happy for me and Andrea cause what it was worked out and everything is a-ok.

(But God Almighty I was so worried!)

lol, sorry to post personal stuff... was just trying to kill time till I heard one way or the other.

Ok now while you're on earth son, pick up a few CDs for me, ok?

Hey Dad, why don't you just get them on KaZaa?

I dunno, Son..I can part the red sea, bring storms of rain for 40 days and nights...but for some reason I just can't figure out XP.

C'mon, Dad it's easy...but this time don't fry the hard drive with fire and brimstone, ok?

Eventually they did kill him for it.

People look at me like I am crazy when I want to begin any debate with discussing the moral legitimacy of copyright in the first place. However, everyone just wants to start by assuming that copyright is the 11th commandment. It makesany discussion difficult.

The fact is, there is no moral underpinning for intellectual property in any religious tradition on the planet. I rant about this constantly. If anyone out there can prove me wrong, I would really welcome the effort. It is after all difficult to prove a negative.

I dunno, Raoul..

If God ever wanted to call in the chips for the Bible, quite a few people would go broke pretty quick, not to mention the sick and twisted types who have modified the bible to discriminate and help themselves. A different sort of Prophet, eh? (One of the more ironic puns in our language)

Thank God and Jesus they are "Open Source" kind of dieties , like schmoo says.

I dunno about that Holy Ghost guy, but God and Jesus would outvote him 2 to 1 anyway.

Jesus and His disciples also had some things to say about those in authority. "Do as they say, not as they do." And the apostle Paul wrote that governments are ordained by God -- His servants to keep order and punish evil(doers). These principles would not be unlimited -- but in context and within reason they are essentially correct. In other words, Christians are to obey the law unless it conflicts with a higher law.

However, the problem is that the law is not clear in this area. The overall intent of copyright law is somewhat vague anyway. How do you determine the balance of public good and private incentive? There is no explicit formula.

But we have explicitly allowed some noncommercial copying in our law, even though the "content industry" denies that. And we are arguing about the extent of it.

Leflaw and others have said they are not in favor of unlimited copying, they are for just compensation. Whatever that means. He hasn't really clarified it in the comments I've read.

Given the murkiness of the whole situation -- the fact that much copying is merely sampling, and does not represent lost sales -- and this has even been proven by careful studies like the Harvard Business School study -- it probably should come down to a personal application of The Golden Rule.

If you were an artist, would you want someone to download all your albums, listen to them constantly for years, never compensating you in any way? I think you'd be justified in feeling cheated.

On the other hand, I may download a lot from a given band, and decide I don't care for it much. I don't intend to listen to it, and eventually probably will delete it. Why would I morally owe anyone anything for that?

Each person has to value the music, and compensate artists accordingly. What would Jesus do? What would you have done to you, if you had made the music? It seems to me that is the fairest way. Of course, record companies don't like relying on other people's consciences. Conscience? What's that?

I hate to say it....but...

One time the disciples asked whether it was lawful to pay taxes on a sabbath. Jesus answer was interesting. He didn't go into a big speech about law and techical issues..he just simply told them....
"Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's...and give to God what is God's."

So I'm afraid his answer would be....if they want money for their product..give it to em. But on the other side of that..in this situation he'd probably add, "...it would be just better if you just stayed away from thier product altogether...they work for greed." pretty much saying..."Boycott it."

independant, don't give the RIAA/MPAA any ideas on what next to try in their fruitless jihad.

I'm sure Orrin Hatch can be bought off to include crucifixion as a penalty for filesharers in his next ill-though bill.

Lets not forget that He is the Lord of Peace, not of confusion. The answer is simple, the One who is the Lord of music, is also the Lord of those who developed the internet.

"Do as they say, not as they do."

and "Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's...and give to God what is God's."

Are quotations largely attributed to governmental (religion and politics = same thing) influence on the bible's text many centuries after the fact. Notwithstanding the fact that most of the text was assembled by the greek authorities 300 years AD anyway.

I think it is pretty clear that Jesus didn't think much belonged to Ceaser anyway.

Jesus would probably let Caesar have his salad.

I was chatting with Jesus this morning, (he was down by the tracks near 16th and Market near the Samaritan House) and I asked him about this. He said zxilton was right.

schmoo, ???? but glad everything worked out ok anyhow.

Jesus would condemn the Pigmedia Bosses Andrew Lack, David Geffen, Edgar Bronfman, Sumner Redstone, and Michael Eisner like he had done while on earth with regard to his conflict with the Jewish High Priest (Pharisees) pointing out, then like now, how these men are "filled with dead man's bones and all corruption" The Lord then like now, would state "do you see these stones? There will not be one that would not be torn down" Like the temple of old, pigmedia's empire will come crashing down. And with it will come a new area and new freedoms and more creativity as well as better selections for us all.

*A new era that is not area.

If you read about the first loaves and fishes miracle in Mark (6:36-3, you will see that Jesus's disciples asked him:

"Shall we go and buy two hundred pennyworth of bread, and give them to eat? "

He made a deliberate decision to replicate the loaves and fishes rather than buy them from the local merchants.

I think if Jesus showed up right now he'd convert everyone's dial-up to broadband and say "Go forth and fill thy hard drives with that which you love. No longer shall you pay those who run the companies, but those who create that which you love."

I was going to register as Jesus, but after I thought about it I decided I didn't want people asking me all kinds of questions about what I'd do.

This whole discussion only PROVES what we all knew all along?????? The RIAA is the Devil!!!!!! As far as Jesus turning water into wine well-------- I know one thing he has turned Beer into Furniture!!!!!!!

Regarding the bread and wine comparison...

If Jesus, had made lakes of wine, mountains of bread, or more pertinent to this issue, if Jesus had given the common schlub the ability to convert water to wine as often as they wished, then this comparison with p2p would make more sense.

Jesus converted water to wine once, a small amount, just to prove he could, as a result, wine was not devalued to any measurable degree, therefore the WIJ had nothing to complain about.

stilltrying- Er, beer into furniture?

But still, shoshidge, based on the arguments of Cary Sherman and Jack Valenti, a single download constitutes a lost sale. So if the likes of Sherman and Valenti had been around then (Valenti probably was but probably hadn't heard of Jesus yet) they would have demanded Jesus be sued for infringing on the local winery's right to be the sole provider of wine. The same applies to the bakers.

The argument here is whether the major record labels have the sole right to distribute recorded sound and whether the downloading of an inferior copy of that recorded sound for nothing infringes on their right to do so and whether that infringement really does cost the labels $150,000 a piece.

SailorArcana----- It's an old preacher joke you see when you accept Jesus Christ as your savior you are change inside and many of the things you used to do you don't do anymore or at least not as much sooooo if you Drank booze alot before Christ now after accepting Christ you don't Drink like you use to but this takes time anyway now you don't spend your money on beer so much and you have more money to spend on other useful things like furniture!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Cars Ect............. so you see how Jesus can turn beer into furniture!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK, let me recap this and then I’m moving on to another article.

In Mark 6:36-41, the replication of loaves and fish was clearly a lost sale. First, the disciples had enough money to purchase food for the crowd. Second, even if they did not, taking up a collection to send someone for carry out would not have been a big deal. Thirdly, the disciples were fully willing and ready to go buy food or send the crowd to buy their own had Jesus not preformed the replication miracle. The net effect was a big lost sales that day to the bakers and fishermen.

It was mentioned that Jesus only did this a few times and so it is not big deal. Well, actually, Jesus gave his Disciples the power to perform miracles, as well. In addition, Jesus specifically states that anyone with enough faith could perform miracles even greater that those he performed.

“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do" (Jn.14:12)

In time, many may have the ability to perform the kind of miracles Jesus performed. Most likely, technology and science will give us the faith and ability to wield these powers. Today, we can perform replication of digital formats, in the next few hundred years we may well be able to arrange matter to our will as well. Replication of bread and fish may become child’s play.

If you believe, as most Christian religions profess, that the message of Jesus is a message for all time, then we must learn from Christ’s actions what we should do when we have the powers he promised. We must look to his example and follow in his teachings and actions.

So, if the INDUCE act passes I guess we have another target for lawsuit…