Max Well

Someone who knows their are 613 mitzvos and flouts them, is a b’meizid.

Yet a 13 year old IS subject to the most serious punishment available to man — the death penalty.

Rav Padwa: Rav Karelitz and Rav Wosner Maintain that One is Permitted to Eat Fish

In the teshuvah, Rav Padwe states that he spoke to Rav Nissim Karelitz of Bnei Brak, who told Rav Padwe that while he maintains that if one knows that the fish in front of him contains an Anisakis worm it may be forbidden, nevertheless, one is not required to examine the fish before consuming it. There are sufficient doubts to rely on, he said, to permit one to eat fish freely without checking them first.

Rav Padwe also relates that Rav Chaim Meir Wosner, former rov of Kehal Yitav Lev in London and currently rov in Bnei Brak, stated that his father, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner, the author of Shevet Halevi, holds this way as well.

“Those of you who finished high-school: what percentage of your classmates went OTD?”

0%

“And how would you label your school (Chassidish, Yeshivish, MO)?”

Yeshivish

There is a few salient points being made here. The HALACHIC issue against copying a CD/DVD (or other intellectual property) is mainly the halachic prohibition of “taking business” away from someone. The secondary point being made against copying is Dina D’Malchusa Dina (DMD). Using DMD is a weak point, since poskim say DMD does NOT apply for monetary issues between Jews. And even if you say these is some posek who holds DMD does apply on Dinei Mominus between Jews, the person who is copying can say he holds from the poskim who say it does not, and a Beis Din then has to honor the defendant’s reliance on said poskim. (Additionally, even if it were a violation of DMD, copying would seem to be on the same halachic level of violation as a pedestrian crossing against the light.)

Regarding the main halachic point of “taking business” away from the producer, there are several limitations. If you use this as the basis of a halachic prohibition of copying, the same logic (of “taking business” away) should equally preclude you from taking a book or CD or DVD out of a public library (i.e. an Artscroll book from the Brooklyn Public Library) if you would otherwise purchase that book, CD, or DVD if the library didn’t have it available. For the same reason, you should be prohibited from borrowing a book or CD from a friend if you otherwise would purchase it. And it should prohibit the entire concept of a Jewish owned library.

And if the copier would not have otherwise purchased the book or CD, then he doesn’t have any halachic problem of taking business away from the producer.

As far as secular law is concerned (not considering the halachic aspects), there is the FAIR USE aspect of copyright law which allows copying music for PERSONAL non-commercial or mass use.

As far as the “leasing” terms specified on some Jewish CD’s, this is a non-standard business practice so unless the FULL terms of the “lease” were made known to the purchases PRIOR to the sale it wouldn’t be binding on the buyer. And it wouldn’t be binding on someone who came into possession of the CD through means other than purchasing it from the retailer. (i.e. he found a lost CD, or purchased just the CD [no packaging] from a friend, etc.)

Also, if someone violates the terms of the “lease”, the other party to the lease (i.e. the producer) would have the right to terminate the lease. But as far as the copy the person had already made, the producer would have no right to take away the new copy. (Even if the terms of the lease made the actual act of copying a violation of the lease.)

The point mosherose made is a very valid one.

Yes, the onus of responsibility for going OTD is on the “kid”. The “kid” is no “kid”; once he hits 13 he is an adult.