I was reading some previous posts about YouTube and copyright infringement. I’ve read and thought about this but would like feedback on my thoughts. If a person regularly listened to music via YouTube videos (let’s say two hours a day) with no regard to whether songs were most likely uploaded without the copyright owner’s permission or not, I am thinking that would not be sinful because if it is available on YouTube it may be available because the copyright owners do not have a problem with it still being up. (More on that last bit below.) Thoughts?
I am asking because I have a loved one who listens to music via YouTube with no regard to source (I don’t know how much so I picked two hours/day for this question) and I often listen with them, so I want to know for my sake and theirs.
I know we are obliged under pain of mortal sin to fraternally correct the grave sins of others if the situation meets the criteria on http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04394a.htm
Contrary to @Fan_of_Trent (You Tube and copyright) & @Cmc1972 (Is it a sin to watch music videos on Youtube that infringe copyright), I think file sharing is a sin (unless public domain or you own the rights) and if what was shared/obtained was expensive (individually or total, but I don’t know what $ amount would reach this level) then it’d be grave matter. Just like I think stealing a candy bar would be venial but a lot of money would be grave. (However, I don’t know where the line between venial and grave in stealing is, my understanding is that it’s not just the amount but also how much harm is caused [& maybe other factors too?].) You are getting access to something without the owner’s permission - that is stealing, and stealing is a sin. Even if you obtained it for personal use and you are not intending to share it more or profit from it, it is still wrong. And I think file sharing is still wrong even if you are using it to access a TV show that comes on a channel you pay for but you just missed the show airing - you are still using illegal means. Illegal means are still wrong even if it’s for something you already paid for. If you can’t access/use something you paid for, you still should not use illegal means to get it. (However, I do think you could directly give someone a copy of a song if you bought an additional copy for each copy you gave away and let each person know that copy had been paid for. Someone let me know if you disagree though).
@bbentrup (Is it a sin to watch music videos on Youtube that infringe copyright), I disagree with “It is NOT theft if the author doesn’t care to protect against downloading”. I don’t know how a person would effectively protect against downloading in general. If you meant to refer to copyright owners who don’t take action against things posted on YouTube, I think that’s different, see below.
((This is not legal advice, do not consider it as legal advice. I am not a lawyer. Only get legal advice from a qualified person.))
CONTINUED BELOW because I ran out of space.