Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck
No, theft is taking something that doesn't belong to the taker.
Copyright infringement is *use* of something the infringer doesn't have the right to *use.*
And--this is where the distinction becomes important--not all use of someone's copyrighted materials without permission is illegal. One of the issues still being sorted out is how much and what kinds of use a person is allowed.
Criminal copyright infringement (in the US) involves "at least 10 copies or phonorecords, of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $2,500." Which means copying an ebook and giving it to four friends is not criminal. It's hard to say that *any* amount of distributing scans of 60's-era comic books is criminal, because there is *no* established retail value for those digital copies.
It could be sued for non-criminal infringement, at a penalty of up to $150k/violation. But that gets into the issue of fair use... what's the market harm in distribution of something that's not in print?
There are other issues attached to "copyright infringement," including derivative works, that get glossed over by the "copies are theft" crowd.
And nobody is arguing that wide distribution of digital copies is okay, is reasonable and legal. They're just arguing that it's not theft, just like making a movie based on a book without permission is not "rape" (of the author's characters). Nobody's taking away anything that belongs to the author (or publisher & other people involved). They *might* be taking away *potential* income... but that's not "theft" even when it's illegal.
Preventing customers from entering a store might be a crime, but it's not theft, even when the store loses money. It could be "interfering with a business" or "fraud" (depending on what's said to people to keep them from entering) or "public nuisance" or "loitering" or "blockading a sidewalk" or various other crimes. And painting over windows is not "theft"--it's vandalism.
There are plenty of crimes that cost people money & income that aren't "theft."
Calling copyright infringement "theft" is nothing more than an attempt to incite harsh emotions by obscuring what's actually happening. You can't get people to get upset over "copyright infringement"--which is already illegal--so you call it something it's not, that you know people object to.
|
You're still merely playing the semantic game here.