In Reply to: RE: How many of those ripped CDs would you have *bought*? posted by RGA on May 3, 2012 at 04:10:51:
"So is it, in reality, theft?"
Yes unfortunately it is."
The conflation of "copyright infringement" with "theft" is a political ploy pursued by the RIAA. The two misdeeds are not at all the same. They have different consequences. When your bicycle is stolen, you have to walk. When a copy of your music is made by a kid who has no money you have lost nothing.
The purpose of copyright is not to compensate "creators" for their work. It is to encourage creators to distribute their work so that society as a whole can benefit. At least this is the expressed reason for copyright, e.g. according to the Constitution of the United States. Historically, an argument could be made that copyright was motivated by desire for censorship.
For more about these issues, see the link below for a free douwnload, courtesy of the author. You can also purchase the book from Amazon.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: How many of those ripped CDs would you have *bought*? - Tony Lauck 08:09:10 05/03/12 (1)
- No question: it is legally theft ^ - Feanor 09:04:31 05/03/12 (0)