Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Is downloading dharma eBooks "wrong"?
In some cultures, piracy is condemned.
While in other cultures, it's embraced.
Therefore I think the concept of morality of downloading books for free is conditioned by local social norms, belief structure, upbringing etc. It's not objectively "wrong" as there's no such thing as objective moral or absolute right/wrong.
For a culture where people have sufficient purchasing power and steady income (from wealthy countries), they might think piracy is wrecking the livelihood of authors.
But for a culture where people earn so little and can't afford to buy a book (they can buy 30 meals for the price of a book) and the book price is raised so high for the purchase of upper class, piracy would be embraced since books are out of reach of commoners and enriching greedy book sellers.
It's just a debate. what's your opinion?
Not all culture is the same.
(I recommend you to try Gigapedia. I learned a lot of dharma there. Without it my progress might be mediocre)
While in other cultures, it's embraced.
Therefore I think the concept of morality of downloading books for free is conditioned by local social norms, belief structure, upbringing etc. It's not objectively "wrong" as there's no such thing as objective moral or absolute right/wrong.
For a culture where people have sufficient purchasing power and steady income (from wealthy countries), they might think piracy is wrecking the livelihood of authors.
But for a culture where people earn so little and can't afford to buy a book (they can buy 30 meals for the price of a book) and the book price is raised so high for the purchase of upper class, piracy would be embraced since books are out of reach of commoners and enriching greedy book sellers.
It's just a debate. what's your opinion?
Not all culture is the same.
(I recommend you to try Gigapedia. I learned a lot of dharma there. Without it my progress might be mediocre)
0
Comments
However there are sites that charge for eBook versions of books published for-profit. If that is the case, then you must of course pay. There are still plenty of actually free eBooks on the 'net though...
In the end, it's still about keeping the precepts and not about our opinions. If an eBook is being sold, we are thieves if we obtain it without paying. If an eBook is freely distributed, then there is no bad karma in obtaining that eBook.
Some of the ancient text requires a lot of resources to get it printed and distributed. The profit earned might be used to support the monks and nuns and their work of compassion.
I can understand that.
But at the end I would prefer to download and read the book free (for the sake of my progress) and donate to the monks and nuns directly.
I'm not that rich to buy a library of books. I need to eat and survive.
It's good to understand the author's career.
It's also good to understand me too.
Namaste
That would be the guideline I would use for myself.
As far as downloading books that are not free,if ya don't pay for it, it is stealing.Taking what is not given.I agree that it is a shame that the dhamma can not always be had for free,but that is the nature of the world.Publishers cost money,costs have to be covered and I guess some profit wants to be made.
The fact that you may believe it is wrong to profit from dhamma does not make it right to steal it.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
But two wrights made an aeroplane.:D
With metta
but removing information for yourself is stealing.
That's just me.
If I copy your book for free, you don't lose a book.
I only gain a copy of book.
It's a matter of debate and opinion.
Steal : take away something from someone....
Cloning something without taking away something? I think "stealing" is a subjective word.
If I live in a country where the book is NOT available for purchase OR the postal of the book is NOT possible, how the hell am I suppose to get the book?
I would download it or ask my friend to share with me.
As I already have said that different culture and individual has different opinion amd moral standards.
The Aztec thinks human sacrifice is a very noble thing to do but you might perceive it as gross and horrible. But you are judging others who have different moral perspective. What if you express your opinion of disapproval without the need to label or condemn others (something like someone tells you that you're gonna dine in hell for being a non believer).
Anyways, back from digressing.
Everything is imparmenant. This includes copyright. It will expire one day and it's be available freely for everyone. By that time wrong becomes right, or perhaps vice versa. Perhaps we can see from a bigger picture?
Digital dharma downloading: Is it sharing? Is it stealing?
http://www.shambhalasun.com/sunspace/?p=6923
http://buddhisttorrents.blogspot.com/
I pretty much agree with the author.
Whether you agree with copyright law or not there is a law.
The precepts are often referred to as training principles for lay people.Unfortunately this has also lead to a wishy washy type of buddhism at times.While a lay person may not be expected to adhere to these precepts as rigidly as a monk is expected to,some sort of ahherence would be a good idea.
If you take precepts I think it is best to take them with some sort of moral purity intended.
Should the dhamma be available for free?Yes,in an ideal world it should.
We may not like paying for dhamma but if thats what it takes then thats what it takes.
With metta
In other words, motivation and effort: Effort to buy the original if you can (or buy it in the future), motivation is for the benefit of all sentient beings.
At least that is what I do, I have some downloaded books, also some copies... when I have the money I buy the originals (It is difficult for me, because I have to buy it through the internet and I don't have a credit card, neither my parents) and the copies I give them (or lend them) to other practitioners who have real interest and can not afford the book (or don't really have strong reasons to buy it).
I understand where you are coming from,and I understand the justification that you are making.However from a purely pragmatic point of view it is still in the eyes of the law theft.If a poor person in Chile goes into a shop and steals food because they are hungry would they be in trouble if they were caught?I believe the answer would be yes,unless the store owner had some compassion.
The precept not to take what is not given does not say unless you are poor or a student.Please do not get me wrong here.I in no way wish to judge you or others.You are of a certain opinion and I am giving my opinion which is coming from a monks view of the situation.So or views will quite possibly differ slightly.
As a monk I can not even take a blade of grass without asking.
With metta
Piracy is duplication without permission from the "owner".
when you add the complex legal and social layers of who "owns" an ebook, it becomes even more murky as to what is the right action in such cases.
namaste
To say that according to our actual laws, making copies is stealing, I think it is not a real good argument (but it is, because it is still context of the society were we are living), because from there the next question arises: do we have to obey unjust laws?
So I think all this problem is reduced to self-profiting and motivation. At least for me is impossible to see the Buddha's moral teachings as being prescriptive and absolute, my comprehension of them is that they are more descriptive and contextual (I'm not saying relativism!).
Well, at least this is how I tend to think Buddhism in the contemporary times
With metta.
It depends. ALL the rights of any copyrighted material, at least in the US, are subject to "fair-use" regardless of what the author does or does not want. One does not need permission from anyone concerning any particular book as it is a condition of being given those copyright rights to begin with, as long as the use is "fair-use". However, fair-use is a VERY sticky legal subject that lawyers even have trouble figuring it out sometimes. It will make your head hurt.
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/search.html/?default_prefix=subject_id&query=6186
I found some on Gutenberg, but they are in Chinese.
More official free sites:
http://openlibrary.org/search?q=Buddhism&has_fulltext=true
http://openlibrary.org/search?q=dharma&has_fulltext=true
http://buddhisttorrents.blogspot.com/2008/04/tibetan-book-of-living-and-dying-sogyal.html
Thanks a lot
There was absolutely no notion of copyright for the entire history of the Dharma up until this present degenerate age. In fact, there was almost no idea of citation and plagiarism either and we find whole chunks of the writing of older masters embedded in newer writers without attribution. This was never viewed as something wrong and certainly not stealing. It *is* illegal in most jurisdictions if used out of certain conditions. Illegal-- not unethical.
If I make sketches of a particular car, study the manuals and then recreate the same exact model with my own parts, show me the jurisdiction that will arrest me for "stealing cars". The whole idea is risible. The illustration someone uses above about sneaking into a movie theatre is deeply flawed. You would not be charged with theft, but rather with trespassing. Even the law does not view sitting in the theatre theft of the movie.
If you are deeply law-abiding and want to respect copyright laws, hey knock yourself out. Just don't lecture me about the morality of the issue. Copyright is yet another government-imposed monopoly that rails against common sense.
In the words of Thomas Jefferson:
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me."
It may be better to follow the law, but something that isn't bad karma doesn't magically become bad karma with legislation. That's giving humans power of karma, which karma is supposed to be a universal law and certainly not subject to human rule.
So if a group of people decide to have X law for having a peaceful life, then breaking it in purpose, having or not the the intention of provoking malicious mischief, it has consequences. Of course I'm not attributing the importance to effect, certainly not, depending on the intention the effect is remarkably different... but still...
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book’s appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
is a hard thing for me to swallow.
One example of keeping things legal:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1322601/China-forces-woman-abortion-EIGHT-months-breaching-child-policy.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
but is legal = "right" ?
I think copyright is bridge when we <copy AND distribute> the material, not copy and read. I might be wrong.