Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H.
It's theft in my jurisdiction. Which is why many courts have used the terms "theft" or "stealing" to describe certain types of what were probably charged as copyright infringement.
"Theft" or "stealing" are very accurate terms to describe taking someone's property without their permission and distributing it to thousands of others, most of whom are anonymous, in such a manner that the owner of the property loses the ability to make money from his or her creation.
This is not "sharing." "Sharing" implies is giving someone something that you own and have the right to give away. Like sharing a sandwich, your toys, or the cookies your mom made you for lunch.
Anonymously posting a cracked copy of a video game where thousands or millions of people can download it for free is not "sharing."
|
I don't think I agree with any of your definitions. I don't see that "theft" has anything to do with distribution, or with anything else that happens to the goods afterwards. Does it matter what an ipod thief does with the ipod after stealing it? If they don't share it, does the charge get lighter? If you want to play with words, I can say that when someone downloads a copy of a file from, say, BitTorrent, that person has the full permission of the person who put the file up. The downloader hasn't stolen anything from the person they are dealing with. There is no theft, just sharing between the torrent clients. There is of course copyright infringement going on. The penalty for theft is also much lighter than it is for copyright infringement in many cases. Shouldn't the "thief" be charged with stealing a $10 book if the charge is "theft"?
The action is already illegal as copyright infringement. I have a bad taste in my mouth when I see some trying to also apply charges for a different crime to it, as well. It strikes me as unjust and so will backfire in the long run.