S/W copying in the workplace: A frum employee's dilemma
From: Anonymous
Date: Mon. July 19, 1999
The issue: Under what circumstances can an employee continue to work for an employer who uses copied software or information etc..?

To start, it would appear to me that there are two major problems with the issue of software (S/W) copying in the workplace.

FIRST, it is not just a case of bad ethics. For many companies (I dare say), it has become a way of doing business. It is entrenched. You see, intellectual property is so easy to copy, and much easier to rationalize away. S/W copying has gone the way of snacking on a few nuts from those bulk bins at Birkat Rachel.

SECOND, it is VERY difficult to get psak on this issue! Very difficult! There's lots of halachic debate, but when it comes to specific situations.....its a problem.

One possible reason for this is that S/W issues are not completely understood and are always subject to change. It's even more difficult to get an "appropriate" psach. It's so easy just to say "quit and find another job"! But it's very tough to find work, even with a lot of Emunah.

So, the issue comes down to, "Is quiting REALLY necessary?", and if so, under what circumstances? What is the most lenient position?

And there I was, brand new job and all, watching a computer "consultant" re-administer a copied version of a network S/W package. It wasn't obvious, but the circumstantial evidence was convincing. Could I use the computer, or run an application? Must I give up my job?

I phoned a major posek, who simply advised me "not to ask any questions". That's it. Dan lekaf zechut? perhaps. Given his limited knowledge of the situation, this was probably the best that he could offer. But it was a good starting point. One's own awareness of the situation does seem to be a factor in a Psach Din. (At least for this one Rav, anyway.) So, practically speaking, when using pre-installed S/W, I (try to) avoid asking questions. Moreover, I make it a point NOT to install S/W myself (or even attaching add-ons) - unless I am sure that what I am installing is legit.

Same company. Tougher situation. The company purchaed statistics on a regular basis - via a CD Rom, from a major information organization. Now, the CD ROM also came with an EXPLICIT contract. Something that could NOT be overlooked. So, "Not asking questions" did not seem to be applicable. The contract permitted in-house usage of the information only. Redistribution in any manner or purpose was strictly forbidden. Nevertheless, my employer had asked me to extract the CD ROM information, input it into the company's database, and include it with a regular information package that was sent to our clients. This clearly was in violation of the stated contract.

Now, "Ain shlichut b'davar Avayra", so I understood that I could be held halachically responsible. From what I have learned, I could be over on an avaira as follows: At the minimum, with respect to Dina De-Malchuta Dina, namely violating a contract; At the maximum, w.r.t. Genayva Gamur. Imagine the questions, involved. Should I refuse to do the task? Can I still send the data out, notwithstanding? What is the scope of the Issur?; of the Avaira?

I consulted a very major posek.

After extensive discussion, the psach I received was basically as follows:
1) I could NOT extract and then input the information as the Company had prescribed. The act would be an act of stealing.
2) Sending the data, after the fact, however, was not labelled as stealing. It was not something to be encouraged, but there was no imperative to refuse to send the data updates, and thereby quit my job because of it.

So, it came down to this. If forced to extract and input the CD Rom information, I would have had to seek employment elsewhere. But it is important to reiterate that while sending the information was not ideal (to say the least), there was no imperative to quit my job because of it. [There were other issues and considerations. But they're too difficult to talk about through this medium.]

Outcome: It would seem from my experiences to date that, there ARE things one can do to maintain your employment and halachic observance, in spite of working in an unethical business environment. (but one should nevertheless continue to look for more "kosher" environments).

The objective that I would like to see dealt with, is how to provide halachic "protection" to the frum Jew working in a work environment such as the one I described above. For all intents and purposes, we can assume that most companies utilize booted s/w in some form or another. But is there some way of divorcing the employee from the actions of the company in some manner, in such a way that he/she could still use the booted s/w. I would like to suggest a possible area of consideration: The inyun of a "Kinyan". Let me leave with a couple of discussion questions: Is there any Shinui by copying S/W, whether it be Shinui Ma-asei or Shinue Shem etc.? To what extent or at what point can we assume there is Yay-oosh on the part of the Vendor? Can a kinyan take place under ANY circumstances whereby the Employer, halachically, has taken ownership of the booted software (while still being liable for monetary damages)? If a kinyan does takes place, such that the Employer now owns the copied s/w , does this mean that the Employee can use the software legally - halachically speaking? Or restated, from the employees point of view, is he permitted to use the s/w now that a kinyan has taken place and notwithstanding that it had been copied? Food for thought, I hope. On this I shall end.

post a comment, response

Subject: Avoda Zara on the Internet?
From David
Date: Tue, 19 Jan, 1999
My company is in the business of publishing materials on the internet. In an effort to expand their readership ('eyeballs'), the management has decided to pursue the American fundamentalist Christian market by developing a new web site that caters to their interests. Part of the content includes uncensored Christian theology. The question is how does this affect me as an employee of this company who works as a programmer.

Is Christianity avoda zara? If so, what exactly am I forbidden to do? Is there a distinction between actually publishing the questionable material and doing work which is not directly related to this material?

Rav Avraham Nadler shlita presented this question to Rav Moshe Shternbuch shlita and he replied that it is permissible to work for this company. I don't believe that the Rav stated an opinion as to whether of not Christianity is avoda zara, but that the work is permissible regardless. The reasons were that The material is widely available from other sources, so that we would not be guilty of placing a stumbling block before a blind man. I am just an employee and did not decide to pursue this activity. Regards, dw

post a comment, response

Subject: Downsizing
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998
From: tzvichaim@juno.com (hershel h frankiel)

I have been a professional in the field of Organizational Development for many years and my studies were with the "Masters " who taught at UCLA in the late 1960's. My clients/employers have in the semiconductor fabrication industry, among others. One firm, in this industry (which was and still is) subject to boom and bust cycles, where I was on the senior staff, laid off 30-40% of technical and production personnel over night (so it seemed to one who was not on the inner sanctum planning). I at this point assumed responsibility to initiating responses for the good health,sanity and productivity of the survivors . I took a series of steps in some good directions and will share as requested.

Before going ahead I would like to know whether others have direct experience with downsizing and what the questions are. My question is: In what ways is a sudden layoff in a company like the experience of mourning for the organizational survivors? What are appropriate and /or valuable responses? My best wishes to all involved in this enterprise.

post a comment, response

Subject: Lashon Hara -- Gossip: "Blowing off Steam"
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999
From: bernie <100320.2664@compuserve.com>

Dear Eliezer,
I enjoyed your article.
Some initial reaction(s)-- In every situation of lashon harah there are 3 parties: (1) the speaker (of the lashon hara) (2) the listener (of the lashon hara) (3) the person about whom the lashon hara is being spoken

Regarding the issue of "blowing off steam" as a "heter" to speak lashon harah-- see sefer Hafetz Chayim "c'lal 10, paragraph 4 subparagraph 14, quoting R. Yonah that in situations where the intent ot the SPEAKER is to reduce his own emotional pain --it could be mutar (i.e. this could constitute a "to'elet").

See also Sefer Hasidim section 64 where the intent of the LISTENER is to enable the speaker to "blow off steam" --and thereby result in his (i.e. the speaker) no longer needing to speak lashon harah--particularly after the listener helps the speaker see the situation in a more positive light (i.e. the person about whom the speaker is "blowing off steam" ends up being portrayed by the listener in a more positive light) -- all this could constitute a heter to allow a person to "blow off steam" (or in the psychological jargon: to cathartically ventilate)

Needless to say, allowing people to speak lashon harah in the name of emotional cathartic ventilation is a heter that can rather easily be abused. This needs further elaboration regarding the limits of subjective Shikul hada'at in such situations where the speaker is, himself a "noge'ah badavar" par excellence.

The issue of "intent" (kavana letoelet) is an issue with far reaching implications.

See Hoshen Mishpat chapter 421 Taz. vs. Sma on whether the intent of someone trying to prevent physical assault is a relevant halachic consideration (and Hafetz hayim part II chapter 9 paragraph 10 in the hagaha--the hafetz hayim assumes that even the Taz would agree that in verbal assualt i.e. lashon harah if the intent emerges from hatred, there would no longer be a heter to speak the lashon harah.

The problem, though, in real life is that "intent" is multifactorial--with both conscious and unconscious determinants. Often there could be an intent to speak lashon harah for both "mitzvah" purposes + "hatred" purposes. I dont think the Hafetz Hayim explicitly addressess this more complex scenario (which, to repeat, I suspect would be rather common: ambivalence being a rather common emotional phenomenon)..

"Ve'yareita me'elokecha" (fear hashem) --for all issues "shemesurim lalev" (thereby requiring a subjective Shikul ha'daat) may be all that can be ALWAYS halachically demanded of the speaker and listener. . . . Dov

post a comment, response

.Subject: Strike in the Second Temple
from: Mark Jay Kaplan
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998

Dear Rabbi Kwass,
I am appreciative of your translation and comments regarding the House of Avtinas and their attitudes toward pride and propriety information. One wonders how they could place such high value on their personal status within their community and keeping the "family recipe" for themselves, rather than the honor and benefits they could have achieved by sharing and teaching.Collaborative research and efforts are so important to us, even today, as is for entire civilizations, so that all of the talents and resources G-d has given us can be used for our global improvement.We are thankful for the achievements of others, because they allow us to build on their creativity and invention. Doesn't the Talmud stress the importance of cooperative efforts and teaching over personal possessions and knowledge?

The news here seems to be centered on the impeachment hearings of President Clinton. What does Talmudic readings tell us of "the priority of sin"? I believe there are 3 "unforgivable sins" ( Moses found out) but at least for the seven Jewish members of the Judiciary committee do they not consider high crimes the breaking of one of the Commandments, or does it require 2, or what about 3, or 4 or even possibly a fifth( Murder- arguably what may have lead to several suicides, or even quite possibly the mysterious death of others, such as Roy Brown, although I do realize that this part is unproven and is just supposition)? Is a personal and private sin ( sexual) just as important as a public sin ( false witness, perjury, taking His name in vain) . A man could build a thousand wonderful bridges, but if he maliciously destroys just one, is he not a man of contempt? Should a man be respected/judged for his own morality over his abilities that may create betterment for others? Does Jewish Law provide thoughts of what is required of a leader? I realize times and customs are different now than in the time of King Solomon and his many wives, yet are there sins that cannot be overlooked no matter how insignificant in nature? When does a little white lie become a transgression or when does a history of small repeated offenses become an act of sin? Finally, can atonement or public remorse and apology erase all sins in the eye of G-D, or for one's peers?

Be well, Mark Jay Kaplan

post a comment, response