jbaldy22–
“From what I heard his reasoning was because it is not sold on the market any more it is not assur.“
Ah, that may be different. There is an ethical debate about copying “abandonware”, and further, Rav Belsky permits the copying of music that’s no longer available for sale anywhere: “A CD or tape which is no longer sold in stores and is not possible to buy may be copied from a friend. However, one must make sure that the item is really not available for purchase. Many old tapes are still being sold online (by the original producer or someone who bought the rights to them).“
Source: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/weekly_torah.php?id=398
“My second (good) proof was from the fact then when asked the question about the i wouldnt have bought it svara he didnt just say its gneiva either way – he just said that the logic doesnt follow.“
This can also be read that the logic doesn’t follow and therefore it’s g’neiva.
“The reason youve never heard anyone talking about my nochri distinction is because no posek in their right mind would ever want to be quoted on such a thing.“
Maybe, maybe not. This is a instance of more to discuss, but not on a public forum (sorry).
“Also by the way the government doesnt prosecute pirates any more they only prosecute uploaders – you could probably download a program in front of a cop and they wouldnt do anything to you. Which is why similarly to HUD dina dmalchusa would not apply according to many poskim.“
Interesting svora. I wasn’t aware that the govt. either officially or unofficially doesn’t go after illegal downloaders. Have you actually heard this from a rov?
BTW, I have no idea what HUD aspect you’re referring to, but I suspect it may also be a “non-public-forum” issue.
HaLeiVi–
“Which Lav is Dina D’malchusa? “
I don’t know. This was just a quick question I asked at the end of a discussion, and I didn’t follow up.
“Unless Rav Belsky meant Geneiva, when Dina D’malchusa dictates who something belongs to or which rights he has. Whenever you’ll find Dina D’malchusa it is in this context. The Malchus has the ability to be Kove’a certain things. We probably depend on that for the Kinyan of checks and wire-transfers.“
Once again, I don’t know. If an unethical “chochom” tries to play games based on the differences between a halachik kinyan and U.S. law, I don’t know how that would be handled.
“Tosafos in Bava Basra 2b learns that Hezek She’eino Nikkar means a Hezek that isn’t obvious, not necessarily that the loss is not physical. Therefore, planting grapes too close to someone’s field is a Hezek Nikkar, while putting a Sheretz on fruits is not obvious because we can’t tell if they are Muchshar.“
True, Tosfos is clearly using the term “nikar” to mean “you can tell while the damage is being done that it is a hezek”, such as klayim still attached to the ground.
“Let’s not forget, Ve’asisa Hayashar Vehatov. “
I strongly agree.
Let’s not forget that people’s parnasa is dependent on their getting paid for their work. Or, in Rav Belsky’s words, “That’s very important to remember. Someone sweated nights and invested money and time in order to create a certain item that the public is interested in, and then he’s ready to sell it. And then it turns out that some Napster type of enterprise gets its hands on it, and people end up paying zero for it.”