Copyright infringement refers to passing off copyrighted materials as your own and making a profit off of them. The entities that make illegal copies of shows and movies available are guilty of copyright infringement.
When someone downloads a show from a torrent site it's not being profited off of. (Is that even a correct sentence?) If no body is profiting how is that considered copyright infringement? What is the punishable crime if it's not copyright infringement or stealing?
This doesn't really cover what is happening when an individual downloads something, not paying, for their own personal enjoyment. We are not talking about a good, a physical thing. But yet, the 'show' is a commodity/service, something that is provided with the intent that something of value be traded for the right to possess and use the commodity.
The idea that this is stealing is the same as the idea that if your neighbor is paying for cable TV and if you piggyback off the source to get cable as well, you are thus said to be 'stealing cable'. You aren't making the commodity unavailable for someone else. You are however not paying for something that is intended to be paid for, in some manner or other, and are thus limiting the possible sale or total potential value of a property.
The legal system still really hasn't caught up with technology and in how goods and services are being transacted in digital markets.
Kirk: Spock, you want to know something? Everybody’s human.
Spock: I find that remark…insulting.
Spock: I find that remark…insulting.
Why is downloading "illegally" really illegal?
- 19/01/2011 03:30:57 PM
1371 Views
you can't legally record and distribute TV shows
- 19/01/2011 05:21:06 PM
1021 Views
Re: you can't legally record and distribute TV shows
- 19/01/2011 09:52:48 PM
1112 Views
Many shows (especially sports) forbid the duplication of said show in a statement or the credits.
- 20/01/2011 03:22:10 AM
973 Views
I haven't been able to read the credits for TV shows in years.
- 20/01/2011 03:51:40 AM
837 Views
Ignorance of the law is not a valid defence *NM*
- 21/01/2011 01:21:25 PM
445 Views
How do you figure that?
- 21/01/2011 02:08:13 PM
924 Views
Re: How do you figure that?
- 22/01/2011 08:33:04 PM
1347 Views
A lot of it's volume.
- 19/01/2011 05:32:03 PM
904 Views
Your argument lacks merit.
- 19/01/2011 05:50:11 PM
920 Views
Both terms lack accuracy in this case really.
- 19/01/2011 06:37:29 PM
1043 Views
That's what I mean right there.
- 19/01/2011 06:48:38 PM
994 Views
We need to distinguish between a crime and a tort.
- 19/01/2011 10:17:30 PM
1023 Views
Very interesting.
- 19/01/2011 10:28:35 PM
1054 Views
Another scrabble word for you is "delict". That's what we call tort in Scotland.
- 19/01/2011 10:37:08 PM
946 Views
It won't get you very many points.
Very nice legal overview, also I like Scotland's approach a lot
- 19/01/2011 11:21:47 PM
868 Views
The case that decided information can't be stolen dates from 1987.
- 20/01/2011 09:35:31 AM
1633 Views
Unfortunately, damages can result in thousands of dollars for one song
- 22/01/2011 08:19:40 PM
804 Views
Here's the US answer on the VCR thing, and how it relates to today's copyright problems
- 19/01/2011 11:35:31 PM
973 Views
Re: Here's the US answer on the VCR thing, and how it relates to today's copyright problems *NM*
- 19/01/2011 11:37:56 PM
426 Views
Re: Here's the US answer on the VCR thing, and how it relates to today's copyright problems
- 20/01/2011 12:49:55 AM
1198 Views