CHRIST ON COPYRIGHTS

For the last couple hours I've been studying, reading legal and ethical arguments swirling from the landmark case "Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd." currently being deliberated on by the Supreme Court. I'm one of a handful of artists asked by the Gospel Music Association to speak on behalf of the recording industry to members of the media concerning all things related to music piracy. And with a decision coming down from on high before the end of the month, probably on Monday, my phone is expected to ring and I'm expected to be knowlegable and persuasive on behalf of music industry profiteers everywhere.

In all this cramming I've learned what I already knew, what you already know. Peer to peer (P2P) networks and services like Grokster claim that they are tools designed for the easy transfer of digital files (music, video, documents etc). They claim to be as illegal as the user wants them to be but the networks themselves, Grokster essentially argues, are not inherently law-breaking. Networks don't break copyright laws. People break copyright laws.

Music traders argue that the defeat of Grokster and services like it will only serve the interests of big business and diamond decked divas. These illegal traders maintain they are merely taking from the rich that which should never have been protected by law in the first place. Furthermore, they claim piracy sells records by piquing the interest of illegal traders enough that they eventually make a legal purchase of music they stole in order to "sample." Networks are the Lincoln of the entertainment world, emancipating art from the label's plantation.

And of course labels and artists (only a third of artists actually) believe copyrights are crucial to sustaining industry, society at large and the creation of art tomorrow. Copyrights make capitalism possible. Labels assert that music piracy is responsible to some degree for the billion dollar profit drop they've experienced since Napster first ran amuck in college dorm rooms. Networks are leaches on an artist's body of work, robbers turned loose in the entertainment companies' vaults.

But where is the Christian response? I've read much if not all of the materials the Gospel Music Association has printed or posted thus far on this issue. I've Googled for any biblical responses well and found very little ethic that was biblical at heart and untainted by self-interest, industry preservation or lectures about porn and viruses lurking on P2Ps. Yet the biblical position is an easy and right one for Christians to make, one which is applicable to more than music piracy.

I'm indifferent to a nation's laws regarding copyrights. I benefit from the current laws but if they were revoked tomorrow my sky would remain intact. It would change but still remain. In fact, there is compelling argument that copyrights were never supposed to last as long as they do today (the life of the composer plus seventy-years). But whether copyrights are good or bad or too far reaching doesn't matter when forming a Christian ethic in response to music piracy.

We as Christians are commanded, COMMANDED, to do two things that if lived out would eradicate music piracy and a lot of truly sinful junk from the Christian community:

1.) OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND IN WHICH YOU LIVE. Romans 13 reminds us to obey man's laws. Christian ethicists I've read speak with one voice on this matter, saying that Christians are to obey man's laws until doing so interferes with obedience to God's laws. No exceptions or loopholes for instances in which man's laws are plain stupid or inconvenient, which copyright law, admittedly, often is. Christians are different from other citizens in that they are willing to obey man's laws at great cost to themselves but never to the detriment of their faith.

2.) PUT THE NEEDS OF OTHERS ABOVE YOUR OWN. 1 Corinthians 10:23-24 says,"Everything is permissible" (talking about what foods we have a right to eat)˜but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"˜but not everything is constructive. 24Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others"

"Everything is permissible" was apparently a phrase used as often in Corinth as "I have the right" is used in America today. When deciding what we as followers of Christ should do or not do we shouldn't first assert our rights but instead think of the cost to others of having our way. And we should think about the wants of others, catering to those wants when they don't infringe upon God's wants.

We have a copyright system enforced by law. Until that law is changed Christians must obey it and in doing so obey God Himself. Most reasons I've heard for flaunting this law center around an individual's perceived need for music or belief in a right to music that fails to take into account God's command not to think first about what we desire or what SHOULD be permissible but instead about the needs of others.

The law Christians follow above all others does not flow from a politician's pen, defined by Supreme Courts and backed up by fines and prison time; but Christian Law is found in the Word of God, taught by the Spirit and backed up by the author Himself working within hearts He's transformed and infected with a hunger for right doing. To urge Christians to obey man's law without invoking God's Law in the process is to place human reason and authority above biblical reason and authority. And to be shocked when non-Christians disobey any law, man's or God's, is to minimize the role of the Spirit of God in empowering the Christian to obey the law, man's or God's.

Of course a Christ-centric argument against piracy and other lawbreaking won't make the average person more respectful of copyright laws. Of course not. But I haven't formed an ethic on music piracy around exclusively Christian teachings because doing so "works". I've done this because I'm a Christian. I think differently about essentials like ethics because I'm essentially different. I wish our industry's position on piracy was too.

Got thoughts? Discuss this SHLOG on my message-board

SPECIAL THANKS TO Adam Haynes, a SHLOG.COM reader who heard my cry for help and sent me a copy of this post he had saved when it was first published. Thanks, Adam. You complete me. I owe you one.