fact: fatwas are merely personal opinions in the form of religious edicts.
fact: fatwas are not binding on anyone except the person who issues them.
fact: mullahs or imams or sheikhs or muftis do not have authority, paralell to the pope or any of the hierarchy of the catholic church.
fact: no such hierarchy exists in islam and muslims believe they are all individually held responsible for their actions, regardless of which fatwa they might choose to follow.
As for the substantive issue at hand, religion is like pottery and each person can mold it to her satisfaction. So, to say that infringing copyright is a sin, a grevious one at that, is simply one person's bought opinion.
Islamic law has many priciples and this opinion seems to abandon all of them. There is no clear text from the Koran regarding copyright - only theft. There is no clear (or even obscure) passage referring to intellectual property rights; no such rights exist in classical Islamic Legal theories. That's the strongest source for a Muslim jurist.
The rest of the sources provide little relief, nothing referring to intellectual property. This "new" property right in Islamic law can only be classified as "shifting in the winds" Islam. So, when Muslims were living under Socialist rule, some muftis claimed socialism is inherantly islamic. Then, under capitalism, some muftis claim that it is inherantly islamic.
Although this form of islam is convenient for its followers, it is dishonest.
The mufti from al-azhar, once classified as the center of islamic learning and now literally a joke among muslim scholars, has been dishonest, to say the least. I wonder if dishonesty is a crime that leads to hell???
Slashdot Mirror
fact: fatwas are merely personal opinions in the form of religious edicts. fact: fatwas are not binding on anyone except the person who issues them. fact: mullahs or imams or sheikhs or muftis do not have authority, paralell to the pope or any of the hierarchy of the catholic church. fact: no such hierarchy exists in islam and muslims believe they are all individually held responsible for their actions, regardless of which fatwa they might choose to follow. As for the substantive issue at hand, religion is like pottery and each person can mold it to her satisfaction. So, to say that infringing copyright is a sin, a grevious one at that, is simply one person's bought opinion. Islamic law has many priciples and this opinion seems to abandon all of them. There is no clear text from the Koran regarding copyright - only theft. There is no clear (or even obscure) passage referring to intellectual property rights; no such rights exist in classical Islamic Legal theories. That's the strongest source for a Muslim jurist. The rest of the sources provide little relief, nothing referring to intellectual property. This "new" property right in Islamic law can only be classified as "shifting in the winds" Islam. So, when Muslims were living under Socialist rule, some muftis claimed socialism is inherantly islamic. Then, under capitalism, some muftis claim that it is inherantly islamic. Although this form of islam is convenient for its followers, it is dishonest. The mufti from al-azhar, once classified as the center of islamic learning and now literally a joke among muslim scholars, has been dishonest, to say the least. I wonder if dishonesty is a crime that leads to hell???