Ethics of Bypassing Paywalls on News

[zippy2006]

Don't forget that in the OT farmers were commanded to leave the edges of their fields for the poor. When people are denied access to things that others take for granted, it's wrong to judge them for wanting a slice of what someone else has an overabundance of. You can call their actions immoral if you want to, but I would be more apt to judge the system that creates them, than the person who's simply a consequence of it.

You are falsely comparing food necessary to live with a website article.

That's one of my pet peeves with society. It divides people between those who have the ability to pay, and those who don't.

Your truck is not with society, it is with reality, money, scarcity, etc. And your Marxist alternative doesn't make everything affordable; it only destroys society.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Is that ethical, to then post the summaries, if I use my library card instead of the paywall blocker as my library gives me free access to these news sites?

There is a grey area, and I don't feel competent to draw where the line is. I have noticed instances where the AI has 'quoted' nearly word for word, entire sentences. At the same time, obviously, I do quote word for word entire sentences, but I restrict myself to whatever I feel is 'fair use' rather than the entire article. The rules here require:

Quoted portions of any work should not exceed 20% of the total work. Materials owned by the Associated Press must be quoted using only one sentence.

You guys have made me decide to deactivate my paywall bypass software today, as both groups of people (Christians and atheists) have said the same thing, that paywall blockers are unethical.

I very much appreciate your willingness to adjust your behavior based on feedback from other posters here.

 

[AlexB23]

Okay, well good for you, that is impressive. I will try to keep an eye out for your post.

Thank you. From now on, I will use my library card to access news sites the ethical way, and will no longer give summaries of sites blocked by paywalls, as folks should be using their library cards to access this information. I will still give summaries of articles posted by the Guardian (donation model), New York Post (as it has no paywalls, though the news there is skewed), NPR (donation model), BBC (ad supported) and any other paper that has open-access information.

For my future post, I will be touching upon the ethical pros and cons of paywalls, using some of the stuff that you said, @Ophiolite said and research. Honestly, news reporters need to make money somehow (even though the CEOs of news companies make millions, the journalists themselves still need food on their table). With all the news releasing recently in our world with the wars and the trial, I am thinking about throwing $15 to the Guardian (UK) or NPR (USA) to help the reporters out.

This is my library's website to access the NYT through a library licensing deal. I redacted the name of the library, as that shows where I live.
There is an article by another library (not from my state) which does something similar to mine, and has a deal with newspaper companies: Access news online for free with your library card

 

[partinobodycular]

You are falsely comparing food necessary to live with a website article.

To me they're very comparable, because they're indicative of a person's value to society. Perhaps you missed the part about all men being created equal, because you seem to assume that money can change that. That due to your economic status you have the right to things that others don't. I'm sorry, but I'm not buying that for a second. To me an honorable homeless person, deserves at least as much as a dishonorable ex-president, yet in keeping with the spirit of Christ I'll respect both of them for simply being what God wanted them to be.

Call my ideals Marxism if you like, but I prefer the term Christianity.

 

[zippy2006]

Perhaps you missed the part about all men being created equal, because you seem to assume that money can change that. That due to your economic status you have the right to things that others don't.

Yeah, we call it "buying."

 

[AlexB23]

There is a grey area, and I don't feel competent to draw where the line is. I have noticed instances where the AI has 'quoted' nearly word for word, entire sentences. At the same time, obviously, I do quote word for word entire sentences, but I restrict myself to whatever I feel is 'fair use' rather than the entire article. The rules here require:

Quoted portions of any work should not exceed 20% of the total work. Materials owned by the Associated Press must be quoted using only one sentence.


I very much appreciate your willingness to adjust your behavior based on feedback from other posters here.

Thank you. And yeah, AI can sometimes quote stuff nearly word for word, according to CNBC and Wikipedia. From CNBC and Wikipedia, both sources say that AI can inadvertently copy 8-44% of texts from books, so if that is the case, AI could infringe rights on articles as well. Mixtral can inadvertently copy 22% of book material. The AI that I use is Mistral 7B, which is not Mixtral, though as both are made by the same company named Mistral. So, I am betting that Mistral 7B also infringes >20% as well.

I think I might have found my favorite subforum here, Ethics & Morality. You guys changed my views on this topic.

CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/06/gpt...ing-ai-models-for-copyright-infringement.html
Wikipedia screen capture below, from: Mistral AI - Wikipedia

For others here, this is a screen capture of the CF rules that @essentialsaltes pointed out.

 

[AlexB23]

To me they're very comparable, because they're indicative of a person's value to society. Perhaps you missed the part about all men being created equal, because you seem to assume that money can change that. That due to your economic status you have the right to things that others don't. I'm sorry, but I'm not buying that for a second. To me an honorable homeless person, deserves at least as much as a dishonorable ex-president, yet in keeping with the spirit of Christ I'll respect both of them for simply being what God wanted them to be.

Call my ideals Marxism if you like, but I prefer the term Christianity.

I like your utopian ideals, but at the same time, journalists have to put food on the table. It would be great if all news websites had a donation run system (pay-what-you-want), but a lot of people would freeload. The Guardian has managed to keep up a donation run system, same with NPR. Now, if you want to bypass paywalls on your own dime (pun intended), you can (cos I am not Jesus or a cop), but from now on, I will be using my library card, as my local library has signed an agreement with the newspaper companies. I will also no longer provide summaries of articles that are blocked by a paywall, due to copyright legislation. I will only summarize articles from papers that are free to access from the get-go, or are free/optionally donation run.

Yes, the CEO of NYT makes $10M per year, yes the CEO of the Wall Street Journal and Fox (Rupert Murdoch) has a net worth of $8 billion. But, the thing is, most journalists only make $57,000 a year, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. That money can get you far in a small town, but in a big city on the West Coast or East Coast, $57,000 would barely get you by.

 

[essentialsaltes]

You guys changed my views on this topic.

If I weren't Mr. Gruff in my avatar, I might be Jet, so I'm charmed to be part of the influence on Spike.

 

[AlexB23]

If I weren't Mr. Gruff in my avatar, I might be Jet, so I'm charmed to be part of the influence on Spike.

Thank you, brother. It is true that Jet from Cowboy Bebop (1998 anime) was a positive influence on the young man named Spike Spiegel. Man, that was my favorite anime, which I watched during the second half of 2023, via DVD from the library, as the show was/or still is not on Netflix or Amazon as of that time. It is sad how the modern 2020s anime nowadays seems to not have as many positive role models, and the new stuff seems more bent on violence and risque content.

God, or whomever you believe in, has helped me realize that being a Robin Hood for you guys was not the best choice. He put you on this forum to change my ways when it comes to paywalls. I am trying to better myself as a young guy to be slow to judge, have better ethics for all things, and to not be hypocritical.

 

[Estrid]

Is it immoral to bypass paywalls? This is a question that many of us internet users might have asked. I will provide a secular and theological explanation of why bypassing paywalls is immoral, though I do bypass paywalls myself, often to help others on CF get access to news from New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Forbes, and others. In the very near future, I will post a companion to this post, discussing why paywalls might be unethical. EDIT April 18, 2024 @ 6:15 PM: I will no longer be using paywall bypassing software to access or to summarize paywall articles, as the wonderful folks on this forum have changed my mind. From now on, all articles summarized by me or AI will be articles that are meant to be publicly available or open-access. For articles behind a paywall, some local libraries have legal agreements with news agencies to allow readers to access articles using a library card code. So, if you folks want to read a WaPo or NYT article for free (legally), please contact your local library for more information.

This type of popup is known as a paywall (Wiki link), for those who have not heard this term. A paywall is used to restrict access to news articles that require a subscription. Some newspapers, such as The Guardian, BBC (news) and the Onion (satire) do not use paywalls, and instead run on an ad-revenue and/or donation-based fee model.
View attachment 346077


Secular Perspective

1. Intellectual Property Rights: Paywalls are often used by publishers to protect their intellectual property and generate revenue. By bypassing them, one is essentially stealing the content that the publisher has worked hard to produce and distribute.
2. Fairness and Integrity: Paywalls create a level playing field for all consumers who are willing to pay for the content. By bypassing them, one is not contributing to the revenue stream that supports the creation and distribution of quality journalism or research.
3. Moral Responsibility: By paying for content, one assumes moral responsibility for supporting the creators and ensuring that they can continue to produce high-quality work. Bypassing paywalls undermines this responsibility and can lead to a culture of entitlement and disregard for the value of intellectual labor.

Biblical Perspective:

1. Stewardship: The Bible teaches that we are stewards of God's resources and are called to use them wisely and responsibly (2 Corinthians 9:6-8). By paying for content, we are being good stewards of the resources that God has given us and supporting those who produce valuable content.
2. Honesty and Integrity: The Bible also teaches that we are called to be honest and have integrity in all our dealings (Proverbs 12:22, Ephesians 4:25). By bypassing paywalls and taking content that is not rightfully ours, we are violating these principles.
3. Supporting the Work of God's People: The Bible encourages us to support those who labor in the Lord's work, including teachers and preachers (1 Timothy 5:17-18). By paying for content, we are supporting those who are producing valuable work that can help us grow in knowledge and understanding.
4. Fruits of the Spirit: The fruits of the Spirit include kindness, generosity, and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). By paying for content and supporting those who produce it, we are exhibiting these fruits in our lives and contributing to a culture of generosity and fairness.

In conclusion, from both a secular logical reasoning/ethics perspective and a Christian Biblical perspective, bypassing paywalls is immoral. It undermines intellectual property rights, creates an unfair playing field, violates moral responsibility, and goes against principles of stewardship, honesty, integrity, and supporting the work of God's people.

Theft of service isn't ethical or legal.
Simple.

 

[AlexB23]

Theft of service isn't ethical or legal.
Simple.

Agreed 100%. Well, the issue has been resolved. Since April 18, 2024, I have made a promise between myself and God, as well as the forums to never bypass paywalls again, even though I was trying to be a "Robin Hood" for getting paywalled news for other people before that date.

 

[Estrid]

Agreed 100%. Well, the issue has been resolved. Since April 18, 2024, I have made a promise between myself and God, as well as the forums to never bypass paywalls again, even though I was trying to be a "Robin Hood" for getting paywalled news for other people before that date.

I guess I don't see why it was ever even a question or
what a god has to do with it.
For me to be dishonest is to betray myself.

 

[AlexB23]

I guess I don't see why it was ever even a question or
what a god has to do with it.
For me to be dishonest is to betray myself.

Ok. Talk later. We are done here my friend. You do not have to force your skepticism on me my friend.

 

[Estrid]

Ok. Talk later. We are done here my friend. You do not have to force your skepticism on me my friend.

What an odd response. I'm in no way trying to
force anything, and "skepticism"- of what-?
isn't it at all.
And don't call me friend, not insincerely

 

[partinobodycular]

I guess I don't see why it was ever even a question or
what a god has to do with it.
For me to be dishonest is to betray myself.

Just for the record, I have absolutely no qualms with bypassing paywalls. (And I don't think that God does either) I'm against anything that serves to proclaim that one person is entitled to something that another person isn't. From my perspective, the paywall is at least as immoral as bypassing it is. So if you can ethically withhold it from me, I can just as ethically take it from you.

 

[jacks]

In practice I've never found it necessary to bypass pay walls. If you do a search on practically any story, you can find it for free.

 

[partinobodycular]

In practice I've never found it necessary to bypass pay walls.

Me neither, but as long as someone reserves the right to withhold something from me, I reserve the right to take it from them.

I realize that this isn't a perfect world, but if it was... then neither withholding it, nor taking it would seem like the charitable thing to do... but if you're going to legitimize one, then I'm going to legitimize the other.

 

[AlexB23]

What an odd response. I'm in no way trying to
force anything, and "skepticism"- of what-?
isn't it at all.
And don't call me friend, not insincerely

Ok, skeptic. Let me believe in Jesus, and the fact that He convicted me on April 18th through the lovely folks on this forum, to no longer be a thief of news.

 

[dzheremi]

Maybe I'm a weirdo, but whenever I am led to an article that is behind a paywall, I simply change course and look for another article on the same topic that is not behind a paywall. I have no trouble letting non-intrusive ads through my ad filter, as I do for this website, for example. Everyone should have the opportunity to make a living.

That said, I have on occasion used certain entirely legal websites based in Europe such as Sci-Hub to download free copies of academic journal articles, as the pricing on those is out of whack with anything resembling reality, and I have it on the authority of academics who I personally know that they do not see a dime from individual downloaded articles/book chapters. I believe there is a case to be made (which, again, has been made by academics in my field) that ethical distribution of such material is possible when the prices that are arbitrarily set by publishers for access to this material is too high. Were this not the case, it would be immoral to use a perfectly legal and beneficial website like JSTOR, but nobody tends to argue that, because it's a crazy thing to argue. There comes a point when the dedication to the spreading of knowledge that is central to the life of the academy outweighs the hoarding of intellectual property rights by corporations, particularly for the more arcane of academic disciplines (as opposed to, say, downloading a top 40 pop song because you don't want to pay for it, which is what many people think of when they think of this topic).

At any rate, I have more than enough titles released by the likes of Gorgias Press (a notoriously expensive publisher and re-publisher of theological works on Oriental Christianity), Brill, Eisenbrauns, Oxford U.P., etc. in my personal library to show that I am willing to pay substantial money for substantial work.

 

[zippy2006]

I have no trouble letting non-intrusive ads through my ad filter, as I do for this website, for example. Everyone should have the opportunity to make a living.

I watched an interesting video recently related to what I would term the "ethics" of web advertising. It's down-to-earth even though Eich literally invented Javascript.