Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H.
No. That's not true at all.
35-41-1-23
Sec. 23. (a) "Property" means anything of value. The term includes:
(1) a gain or advantage or anything that might reasonably be regarded as such by the beneficiary;
(2) real property, personal property, money, labor, and services;
(3) intangibles;
(4) commercial instruments;
(5) written instruments concerning labor, services, or property;
(6) written instruments otherwise of value to the owner, such as a public record, deed, will, credit card, or letter of credit;
(7) a signature to a written instrument;
(8) extension of credit;
(9) trade secrets;
(10) contract rights, choses-in-action, and other interests in or claims to wealth;
(11) electricity, gas, oil, and water;
(12) captured or domestic animals, birds, and fish;
(13) food and drink; and
(14) human remains.
(b) Property is that "of another person" if the other person has a possessory or proprietary interest in it, even if an accused person also has an interest in that property.
35-43-4-2
Sec. 2. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally exerts unauthorized control over property of another person, with intent to deprive the other person of any part of its value or use, commits theft, a Class D felony.
|
I personally see no contradiction. While copyright might indeed be a property, violating itstill is not theft . Since you still have your copyright - it was not taken from you. You can still sell your movie rights et cetera. You can use it and it still have the same value.