Copying is not theft

From ADFA: Audenshaw Digital Freedom Association

If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object.

If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas.

-George Bernard Shaw

Copying is not theft. We will explain why this is the case, and what we hope to do about this common misconception. The examples on this page mostly centre around music and record companies; however this is exactly the same as with films and film studios.

Theft is when you take something from someone. You have it and they don't. However, with digital media, you can not really take it from them (besides deleting it from their computer). You simply copy it, so that both you and them have a copy. Sharing music is not directly harming anyone.

[edit] Law

We believe copyright law needs to be reformed, to meet the needs of the modern world better. It is also interpreted in a far too severe way. However, even copyright (ie. the law) does not say that copying is theft, it just says that it is legal.

Also, the original purpose of copyright was to prevent someone else profiting from an authors work. This makes sense, if someone makes something then only they should be able to make money from it. Commercial copying should be illegal (but nonetheless is not theft).

However, file sharing is not commercial, nobody is making money instead of the author. Therefore, we believe it should not be illegal. Instead, users benefit from easy access to the authors work. The author can still make money from the work, because many people are still willing to pay if a artists work is particularly good (this may be less than currently).

[edit] Lies

Record companies like to confuse people with their propaganda. All digital media is copies - they say not to download copies, but to get it from them instead, which is also a copy! They like to benefit from the amazing copying ability of the internet themselves, whilst trying to stop other people from doing so.

[edit] Artists Right to Money?

Record companies like to say that they and artists have a right to earn lots of money. Yes, they should be able to earn money, but they shouldn't restrict and persecute people - their fanbase! - in order to do so. Also, the new sharing power of the internet makes it much easier for new bands to promote themselves - surely these are the ones that we want to promote, not the already super-rich ones!

And, artists can still make money, people will still pay, especially for things such as live concerts. They may not get as much money, but is being able to get super rich a human right? Also, sharing through the internet allows bands to cut out the middlemen, so get a higher percentage of their earnings. Yes, this middle man is the record companies, which is probably why they're so unhappy - but a world without record companies would not be a great loss - contrary to what they say, sharing fosters creativity)

IMHO you've got the right aneswr!

That's really thinnkig out of the box. Thanks!

[edit] To Share is Human

Sharing is a very human thing. Our entire culture, language and educations depends upon copying and sharing. People enjoy sharing things, which is why video sharing sites like youtube are so popular.

By saying saying that copying is theft, how does it not follow that we stealing when we listen to something and copy it into our brains? Surely we should pay when we sing a copyrighted song such as "Happy Birthday to You". Of course, these are not the same as filesharing, but in the same way filesharing is not the same as theft.

[edit] Far too harsh!

Even those who are still of the opinion that private copying should be illegal would be crazy to claim that it should be treated the way that it is today. Surely the penalties are too harsh! Do eight year old girls deserved to be sued for thousands of pounds by the RIAA? (Record Industry Association of America - a group made up of several different record companies).

This litigation would not be so bad if it was actually consistent, or actually went after the real criminals in any way. The massive CD copying operations etc. are a bigger problem, yet the RIAA are too scared to go after them, and would rather prosecute grandmas and single mothers. They just want to create scapegoats and instil fear into people.

I didn’t know where to find this info then kbaoom it was here.