Computer program for video editing

How about Adobe After Effects JK

what type of editing do you want to do

Alternatively, go for the more expensive software mentioned above and download it free [in accordance with halacha — AND DON’T START ON THAT!!!] online.

Easy!

Depends where you look… 🙂

The following is from the Torah dot org website:

QUESTION 15: HOW STRICTLY SHOULD ONE ABIDE BY THE ‘TRIAL PERIOD’ OF SHAREWARE SOFTWARE

QUESTION

Some software that can be downloaded for free from the Internet comes with a provision that it is free only for an “evaluation period”, let’s say for thirty days, after which the software must be bought or destroyed. How strictly must one abide by this provision?

RABBI BELSKY’S ANSWER

If a person needs more time for the evaluation period, I’m sure the company will not mind. It can be thirty-one days, or thirty-five days — as long as it is still an evaluation period. When a person takes something for evaluation and keeps it, it is, as Rabbi Moshe Feintstein said, echt gezel (genuine theft).

I tell people constantly that no real success will come from something a person takes — a book, or anything else — that a person could buy, but which he figured out a way to get without buying. The person who produces the item wants to sell it. Typically the justification that the person who wants to use it gives to himself is that he wants to use it for some grand purpose. But think: what value does a grand purpose have that was achieved through gezel (theft).

QUESTION

There’s something called “share-ware” where a person is supposed to pay a $20 registration fee. I think the estimate is that not more than 5% of the people who use shareware actually pay for it.

RABBI BELSKY

But that doesn’t make it right not to pay for it. If a person steals, he affects himself; the act affects his soul. You can’t steal something and then hope to be the same person afterwards (emphasis mine – icot.) It is important to appeal to people on the basis of themselves.

QUESTION

So it is also between a person and himself?

RABBI BELSKY

Yes.

My prior post on this thread was not approved.

Chaval that a frum site like this one should have posts advocating software piracy.

(please Google the above, with quotes, to see the full thread and its context.)

ICOT

Thanks you saved me from tuning on the flames.

I dont know why people think its mutar to steal from non Jews but its not mutar this has nothing to do with dina dmalchusa.

ok hi i am a pro in video editing lets make it short and sweet 🙂

pro show

adobe premiere

or power director

good luck with evreything!

Just how did you manage to use the Ra”n to make that quantum leap from violating a Dina D’Malchusa to being oiver on one of the Aseres Hadibros??

Right – I don’t want this thread to turn into a ‘can you copy cds in halacha’ thread, which always gets nowhere. I just want to put down a few ??????:

a) If I buy a program, I have now the rights to do what i like with it – think of a guy who buys a light for the top of his candle, and the seller doesn’t let him light any other candles. He smiles and lights twenty five candles. No problem in halacha. Once i have bought something, it become mine.

In Jewish, we call it a ????.

— And there is definitely no ????? for me to go to somebody with a candle and ask him to light it for me – no matter where he got it from.

b) Even if the Jewish music manufacturers have started using ????? and not-whats, the Adobe Corporation haven’t. And as far as i know, clicking ‘Terms and conditions apply’ is not halachically binding. And even if it is, i don’t think this will affect anything.

c) It isn’t ????? or ????? to copy, because there is nothing. Like there is no problem of ????? of the ?? ???? – or ???? if we are digital – because it is a ??? ???? ?? ???, so to there is nothing to steal. I clicked a button; that is not a ???? ?????.

d) After ????, let’s take on that the ???? is halachically binding [even though it is not – not for now – that will be for whoever bought the program and uploaded it online. I don’t need to keep to YOUR ?????.

Why exactly, is the ?”? helping me violate one of the ???? ???????? Unless using the Internet is a problem?

yekke2–

a) If I buy a program, I have now the rights to do what i like with it – think of a guy who buys a light for the top of his candle, and the seller doesn’t let him light any other candles. He smiles and lights twenty five candles. No problem in halacha. Once i have bought something, it become mine.

In Jewish, we call it a ????.

And if one uses something he purchased in a way that isn’t halachicly allowed, in Jewish we call it a ??

And there is definitely no ????? for me to go to somebody with a candle and ask him to light it for me – no matter where he got it from.

So there is clearly no issur to copy a sefer, book, CD, program or anything else that someone else has purchased. There is also no issur to make multiple copies and sell them for your own profit. Patents can likewise be ignored, and the patented item copied and sold with halachic impunity.

b) Even if the Jewish music manufacturers have started using ????? and not-whats, the Adobe Corporation haven’t. And as far as i know, clicking ‘Terms and conditions apply’ is not halachically binding. And even if it is, i don’t think this will affect anything.

c) It isn’t ????? or ????? to copy, because there is nothing. Like there is no problem of ????? of the ?? ???? – or … if we are digital – because it is a ??? ???? ?? ???, so to there is nothing to steal. I clicked a button; that is not a ???? ?????.

One isn’t yotzeh a brocha over the phone. Does this mean that loshon hora over the phone isn’t a problem?

d) After ????, let’s take on that the ???? is halachically binding [even though it is not – not for now – that will be for whoever bought the program and uploaded it online. I don’t need to keep to YOUR ?????.

What a great piece of logic! From now on, I’ll buy anything I want and then let a family member violate all purchase conditions. Conversely, I’ll have my wife buy Artscroll’s latest sefer and start running off copies myself!

I’ll sell the list of customers the bank I work at maintains to competitors (indirectly, of course, so I don’t violate any job-related tenaim).

I’ll sell the latest nuclear technology my firm has developed to North Korea!

It falls far short of that, however. It is merely an endorsement of genaiva, sheker, chilul H-shem and who knows what else.

Is there even one posek who accepts the claims and hetairim you made above?

I find your post disgusting, and to me personally it is a chilul H-shem that a frum person could not only think that way but actually try to get others to act shelo ka’halacha.

vochindik–

yekke2’s comments are halachicly correct and sound.

What’s your basis for saying this?

May I have your social security number? and your bank account number? If not, is there a halachik problem if I get them myself?

Following the Dina D’malchusa in this case is a chumra because many Poskim hold that Dina Demalchusa applies only to laws that govern the relationship between you and the government (such as taxes etc), but for regular Bain Adam Lechaveiro tort laws we follow Choshen Mishpat, not Dina D’malchusa.

And yekke explained why it isn’t halachicly assur.

vochindik said:

“And yekke explained why it isn’t halachicly assur.”

Voch, Halachically Assur aher,

Halachically Assur aheen,

Bottom Line…Would the 3 departed Gedolim referenced above say you should do it??

Stop pontificating!

Put your $ where your mouth is!

You know they would never advocate such actions.

That’s why they were heilige Gedolim…and you’re vochindik.

If you knew any of them just a wee bit, you would not have to see a t’shuva from them to know how they held.

Sadly, there are precious few of them left to watch and learn from.

Still, in Elul, should we not try to go a bit ‘lifnim meshuras hadin’, just as we would want HKB”H to do soon when judging our (mis)deeds?

Yekke

http://halachafortoday.com/questions-answers/qa3/

Moderator/Editor-

My prior post has been languishing in limbo-land – neither approved nor rejected – for about twelve hours now.

I’m not sure if that’s because it’s such a long megilla that it hasn’t been read yet, or because it contains iffy content.

If there is anything in the post that is questionable or not allowed, please be so kind as to remove it and put “edited” in the place of the removed content.

Thank you.

Sept. 4, 2012 12:04 PM

Wasn’t read yet. I seem to be the only mod on duty for the last many hours and I don’t really have patience for all these megilos so they are waiting for another mod to decide to read them.

It is your responsibility not to accept threads and comments that need to be addressed to a Rav on an individual basis and in private. People pasken halocha from these posts, and people think that they have a window on Jewish attitudes based upon what is posted here. They don’t have a clue which posters are knowlegeable people, and which posters are bored kids.

Just for the record, I am a bored kid. I hope nobody will pasken anything from what i write, and apparently ICOT also hopes the same.

I am just putting forward arguments.

Moderator/Editor-

Please reject my as-of-yet-unapproved “megilla” post from last night.

I now believe that the approach I took in that post was not the correct one.

Thank you, again.

ICOT,

Now you’ve whet my appetite,

and then you ask not to be posted??

That’s simply not fair!

At least have the mods forward your ‘megilah’

to my email address.

I’m sure your points are valid.

They usually are.

REALIST–

Thank you for the kind words – flattery gets you everywhere.

I am perfectly fine with a moderator emailing you (and “yekke2” and “vochindik”) my rejected post. I stand by everything I said in it; I just don’t think it should be posted in a public forum for the reasons given.

vochindik–

1) Incorrect. The overwhelming majority of poskim who discuss intellectual property do NOT make a blanket prohibition against copying. And as I indicated above, nor is their a blanket heter to copy either.

That’s not what I said. Nobody said anything about a “blanket prohibition”. Rav Belsky explicitly allows copies to be made by the purchaser, both for backup purposes and for using on another device.

2) Correct. On an individual basis, with the rabbonim specifying when it expires. And this was based on hasagas gvul. Not geneiva (otherwise it would have been permanent, non-expiring.) And it didn’t apply to all works, unless the rabbonim gave the sefer a specific cherem. Furthermore, it applied a temporary prohibition only to *commercial* copying-to-sell, where obviously you are taking away business from the producer who would have otherwise sold it to the customers the copyer sold it to. Hasagas gvul. It did not apply to personal copying. (Obviously there was no personal single-copying feasible in those days.)

a) It was done on “an individual basis” whenever it was requested. A cherem (excommunication) is pretty serious – it shows how reprehensible rabonim thought copying someone else’s work was, regardless of what halachos it was or wasn’t based on.

b) “ And this was based on hasagas gvul. Not geneiva (otherwise it would have been permanent, non-expiring.)“

I’d like to hear this explained – I sure don’t get your logic.

c) “Furthermore, it applied a temporary prohibition only to *commercial* copying-to-sell, where obviously you are taking away business from the producer who would have otherwise sold it to the customers the copyer sold it to. Hasagas gvul. It did not apply to personal copying. (Obviously there was no personal single-copying feasible in those days.)“

This makes as much sense as saying “This temporary prohibition didn’t apply to photocopying”. Of course it didn’t apply to technology that didn’t exist in those days.

3. No it is not “genevia”. And very few of the poskim consider it halachic geneiva. They consider hasagas gvul.

If you look up the many frum sites that post this discussion, you’ll find genaiva and hasogas gvul the predominant issues.

Rav Moshe said it’s genaiva. Rav Belsky says it’s genaiva.

“vochindik” says “No, it’s not ‘genaiva'”. Period.

4. I explained above why dina dmalchusa is not relevant. So that only leaves hasagas gvul. And hasagas gvul ONLY is relevant if you caused a lost sale. If there was no intention of purchasing it (i.e. a $5,000 photo/video editing software), there is no hasagas gvul.

a) “I explained above why dina dmalchusa is not relevant.“

Rav Belsky told me that dina d’malchusa applies for laws that allow society to function and are for the benefit of society. Intellectual rights (patents, copyrights, trademarks) clearly fall with that realm. I have heard this explanation from others who know halacha as well, but they’re not rabonim. There are several explanations of dm”d that can be read online (with the authors noted), and they usually follow this explanation.

There may be those who disagree with this viewpoint – one of the write-ups I saw mentions a tosfos that says is much more limiting – but to simply blow it off is wrong.

“And if you want to “see it inside” from a halacha sefer, see Pischei Choshen, Geneivah, page 284.“

In the following page, poster “hello99”, who is much more knowledgeable on this issue, says that while the mekor you post does seem to show he is matir copying, a couple of pages earlier he quotes the Bais Yitzchok as saying it’s an issur gezel.

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/heteirim-for-copying-and-giving-out-music/page/3

I don’t know who Rav Yaakov Shapiro is.

A couple of questions:

1) Is there a source where I can look up his heter?

2) Is he your posek?

3) Have you actually asked your rov questions about this? IIRC, Rav Feivel Cohen is someone you hold of – any idea as to his opinions on this?

My observations on this are:

1) You’re cherry-picking specific opinions to find hetairim;

2) I really wish you’d respected my request not to drag me into a public discussion on this halocha.

3) I also wish, if you insist on debating this on a public forum, that “hello99” would jump in here, since he clearly knows a bit about this issue and which poskim said what. For whatever reason, you’re completely ignoring all the points, mareh mekomos, and rabonim/poskim he brings down on that thread.

Rav Moshe writes in the Igros Moshe that it is midas sdom for the producer to be makpid on copying if it causes him no loss.

Btw, looking at Rav Belsky’s position in greater depth indicates Rav Belsky holds the issue is hasagas gvul and not halachic gezeila.

And I disagree with Menachem’s reasoning to not discuss this. You could use that reasoning to discontinue all halachic discussions here. And we are discussing the permissiveness on this issue exclusively limited to where the producer does not lose any sale. All other circumstances we all agree it is prohibited to copy.

The poskim on dina dmalchusa state it is limited to issues between a person and financial responsibilities (taxes) to the government. Rav Yaakov directly posted his position I mentioned on his hashkafa website; google without quotes “shapiro halacha music downloaded unpaid for”. My rav indicated it is not a halachic issur of either gezeila or dina dmalchusa. It may or may not be a problem of hasagas gvul depending on the circumstances. And if the circumstances permit it, there is no other halachic prohibition. Rav Moshe is O.C. 4:40:19.

I can only try: I’m tired of hearing you ask me the same questions repeatedly with slightly changed wording and then when I respond to your repeated question to help you understand, you only shoot out that I changed what I am advising you. (I am not.) The point is dina dmalchusa is inapplicable regarding monetary issues between two non-governmental parties, per most poskim including Rav Eliashev. And you’ve not only mischaracterized what I am relating, but you’ve done so as well regarding what Rav Moshe and what Rav Shapiro said. Rav Moshe said it is a midas sdom to stop someone from copying where no sale is lost. Rav Belsky shlita takes a more chumradik position on this than most poskim, but he is not the posek hador like Rav Moshe was. (And do you use a Shabbos-clock on an AC, against Rav Moshe’s ruling? Do you drink unfiltered NYC tap water, per Rav Belsky’s ruling, which is permissive despite most poskim being non-permissive?) And Rav Eliashev did NOT give a “haskama” that printing such a tnai makes it prohibited to copy. The bottom line is that most poskim allow copying in a case where the producer takes no loss. None of the poskim mentioned so far, with the notable exception of Rav Belsky, bring a teshuva being non-permissive in a case where no loss is sustained.

All things considered, we are going in circles. So I will now honor your request to no longer currently discuss this in public here If you wish to have the last word (or two – or even three postings), the floor is all yours. I rest my case.

Correction:

I did a poor cut-and-paste job in the third and fourth paragraphs of my previous post.

Here is the way they should have appeared:

I also see I typed “statues” instead of “statutes”. oy.

This isn’t worth correcting by itself, since it’s obvious what I meant, but the first correction was for a quote that was truncated, and much more significant.

I can only try: Sigh, if you really don’t want the discussion to end, and consider it cowardly to close the discussion, I’ll grace you with a response. Though, my instinct is that even though this is an issue you feel strongly about, you will soon be contrite over your poor choice of words in this discussion. After all, was it not you who made THIS comment to folks who, too, strongly felt about an issue?

Rav Shapiro said that per RYSE the tnai itself is acceptable to be used but that RYSE never indicated that the buyer ever agreed and is therefore subject to the tnai — and that he is not, in fact. Also, all three rabbonim I have discussed (unlike Rav Belsky) do allow the individual to trust his own judgement as to whether he would or would not have purchased the CD (or other IP).

You also question my describing the majority of poskim’s position since you think I probably don’t know what the majority hold, yet a few days ago above you yourself describe a position as that of the “overwhelming majority of poskim” without any knowledge of such. Nevertheless, even putting aside the question of majority, I have repeatedly pointed out that my own Rov paskened it is permissible to copy. Yet you persist in falsely saying I am “cherry-picking”. Sticking with my own Rov’s position, the same Rov I use for ALL my shailos (when he is available), is hardly “cherry-picking”. Furthermore, even though I hadn’t identified him, I did give you two other poskim who are on-the-record that copying is permissible under the circumstances. One I provided you a maare makom in a halacha sefer and the other I provided you with a Rov you can easily contact directly.

Ksiva V’Chasima Tova

OneOfMany–

Apparently not 🙁

1) It’s not slaying a troll, it’s merely attacking one of the Hydra’s heads.

vochindik–

And here we go again…

Of course I wanted it to end, several posts ago in fact. But since you clearly can’t stand not to have the last word, here is your excuse for violating your earlier pledge not to continue; I guess this is your way of continuing.

Oh, please.

I know exactly what time of the year it is, and which Yomim Tovim are coming up.

I regret nothing I said here, and (believe it or not) am trying very hard to expose the bad faith you’ve engaged in throughout this entire discussion without personally attacking you.

My *only* point about dina dmalchusa in this discussion, is how it relates to this issue being discussed. We could have a six page discussion on just dina dmalchusa, and all its intracacies and various opinions, if we so wished. But that wasn’t where I was going. I was simply pointing out that there are shittos, probably in the majority and including RYSE, that interpersonal (and business) monetary issues aren’t covered under DDD. Nor are criminal statues covered across the board. If Congress passed a law requiring, under criminal penalty, that all Americans hang a picture of the POTUS on their wall, DDD would not require compliace with that law despite its being criminal in nature and even assuming it not being a violation of halacha.

A ridiculous example.

Per WHICH poskim?

And you are saying that Rav Belsky and any other posek who says dmd applies for things other than taxes and counterfeiting is arguing with the Shulchan Aruch? If so, I don’t believe you.

Furthermore, I won’t even loo up the Shulchan Aruch now because:

b) Almost every single reference that you have supplied until now that I looked up has been misrepresented by you, either thru distortion or omission.

Rav Shapiro said that per RYSE the tnai itself is acceptable to be used but that RYSE never indicated that the buyer ever agreed and is therefore subject to the tnai — and that he is not, in fact.

Here’s the quote:

Also, all three rabbonim I have discussed (unlike Rav Belsky) do allow the individual to trust his own judgement as to whether he would or would not have purchased the CD (or other IP).

You also question my describing the majority of poskim’s position since you think I probably don’t know what the majority hold

True.

…yet a few days ago above you yourself describe a position as that of the “overwhelming majority of poskim” without any knowledge of such.

A valid point, believe it or not.

Rav Belsky, lbclc Rav Moshe, and the overwhelming majority of poskim and rabonim whose opinions can be found online also say it isn’t allowed, for varying reasons.

I didn’t make notes on all those who forbid copying music, but Rav Schapiro and Rabbi Bleich are the ones who I saw allow it.

Yet you persist in falsely saying I am “cherry-picking”. Sticking with my own Rov’s position, the same Rov I use for ALL my shailos (when he is available), is hardly “cherry-picking”. Furthermore, even though I hadn’t identified him, I did give you two other poskim who are on-the-record that copying is permissible under the circumstances.

However:

2) You DID omit parts of what Rav Schapiro said that were machmir and that said that even if hasogas gvul wasn’t a halocha “it is unethical and should not be done” portion of his explanation of “yored letoch umnosoh…”

I have addressed every single point in every one of your arguments.

-Some I have challenged.

-Some I have agreed with.

-One or two I have conceded on.

Ksiva V’Chasima Tova

You, too.

While we’re on Rosh Hashona plans, here’s a bit of advice from someone who’s stuck up for you a few times in the past:

-Do teshuva.

-Realize the damage you can do to a Rav’s reputation if you present yourself as a follower of his and act unscrupously.

-Stop trying to fool people and present yourself as something that you are not.

-Be honest.