Q&A: Source for a Halakhic Ruling
Source for a Halakhic Ruling
Question
Good morning. Last night in Rabbi Youngster's class, I brought up the topic of your lecture on doubt and statistics, regarding the protection of intellectual property. If I understood correctly, the halakhic source was the prohibition against reading someone else's letter. A debate came up as to whether in a principled ruling like this one it is always necessary to rely on a source, and whether this is a source that is appropriate to use for the purpose of a halakhic ruling. I would be glad to hear your position, although I think I know what it will be.
Answer
This is not a question of need. Clearly, in practice, even if there is no halakhic prohibition, there is certainly a moral prohibition, and one should not infringe on intellectual property.
Beyond that, without a halakhic prohibition, it is impossible to sue someone who infringes on intellectual property in a religious court.
If so, it is important to understand whether there is a halakhic prohibition and not only a moral one. Still, one could argue that even on the halakhic plane there is no need for a source, because there is logical reasoning.
But that too is incorrect, because in the case of intellectual property one cannot say, "Why do I need a verse? It is logical," since there is an explicit halakhic principle that says there is no intellectual property, because there is no ownership of abstract things. Therefore, a halakhic source is needed to explain why here there is.
By the way, the source is not the prohibition against reading a letter, since that itself apparently has no source (it is the ban of Rabbenu Gershom). The source is deception, which is prohibited by the Torah.