New
#70
Very nice insight, thanks for spending the time to post it!(NOTE: I talk about the law in the USA because I am unaware of laws in other areas.)
Stealing is a definition of law. Law varies from political area to political area. For instance, during an emergency, in the USA it is not illegal to take food and other necessaties from retail shops. One can legally break into a store and take some food and drink without being considered a thief or criminal. Such actions occurred during the devastation of New Orleans from the breaking of the levy by hurrican Katrina. Doing this at any time other than emergency is considered theft and prosecutable.
The law in the USA at the moment states you cannot redistribute copyrighted material without permission of the copyright holder. Doing so may not be theft, but it is a criminal act and it is punishable by fines and jail time. This includes making a copy of a cassette tape and giving it to a friend, making a copy of a video tape or DVD and giving it to a friend, and yes, file sharing. It is not illegal to download or receive copyrighted goods though. This type of legislation was enacted decades ago to prevent rental stores from buy one copy of a movie, making multiple copies, then renting out each copy. They didn't want to target the consumer who would most likely be unaware of the illegal activity. They wanted to target the store owner and other groups of people doing it. Most video media even have a little legal warning at the beginning of the tape or DVD to point this out.
File sharing by its nature involves receiving and retransmitting received copyrighted material, so it tends to draw fire for that part. If one downloads a file using a peer-to-peer type of system, they are redistributing the product. If they just download it from a website or usenet or other system which is one way, they are actually not technically breaking the law.
Sharing of copyrighted material, or pirating as it's been called, is illegal in the USA. One's justification does not change the law. One's intent does not change the law. The law is only concerned with the act and nothing else. It is not at this time theft though, by the definition of law.
Piracy became equated with theft a couple of decades ago when copyright owners could point to actual losses due to lowered sales and other financial gains caused by the act of piracy. In today's world, such losses are harder to prove if they exist at all. Because of the attention given to copyright violation, most industries have a standard practice of ensuring compliance with these laws -- so much so some companies have personnel dedicated to only this act. For noncommercial uses, such as the average home user, there are some reports pointing to an increase in revenue for copyright holder due to the marketing or attention file sharing has given their products. Some bands noticed increase in brand recognition and sales afte releasing a few select songs on the internet with public domain copyrights. It is this marketing value and recognition which initially inspired the creation of DRM systems. Many companies realized they were ignoring and actually attacking a revenue venue they had never previously utilized.
Additionally I think all of us here can agree the pirating of Windows 7 (up to this point) has given many people a chance to test and abuse it. Since it is such a great product, I would argue the pirating of Windows 7 has actually caused the product to gain in support and favor which will ultimately lead to it being purchased quicker and in larger quantity than its predecessors. This would be one definite example of file sharing providing substantial financial gains to a product. Once it's released though we'll see how much purchase versus pirate activity occurs, and the arguement may swing in the other direction.
So, file sharing is not theft. It may not even be damaging the financial status or copyrighted materials but actually bolstering them. Nevertheless in the USA it is still an illegal act and as such does make people who share copyright files criminals. As someone else pointed out previously though, smoking in a nonsmoking area, or walking on public grass clearly labeled with a sign prohibiting it or driving above the speed limit makes one a criminal. There's a reason the USA has different classes of crimes: misdemeanors and felonies. And even different classifications of felonies.
Personally I would like to see copyright holders protected from abuses and financial losses, whether they are a large corporation or an invidual. I believe in the valuing of individual intellectual property and firmly believe people who create such properties deserve to have their efforts financial rewarded. I do also recognize depending on the product file sharing can cause financial loss but it can also provide financial gain. It's a matter of personal judgement and action as is the case with so many things.
As much fun as this discussion has been, if you'll excuse me, I have to go see if the latest build of Windows 7 has finished in Shareaza yet.
