@hollyjahangiri @rysiek
>But sharing copyrighted files when the artist/author is selling them and not made them sharable or has expressly written that they are not the be shared is also theft.

No, it's not.
The artist doesn't lose anything they had before.

@hollyjahangiri @rysiek
Imagine I have a bakery, and you work in it. Then I fire you, so you open your own bakery across the street, luring some customers over.
Does that mean you're stealing from me?

@Wolf480pl
Not the same thing.
@rysiek

@Wolf480pl
Sure they do: incentive to share more.

I started to say respect, but clearly, working artists have none already. Till they're dead, and their work is worth more among collectors who know there won't be any more.

@rysiek

@hollyjahangiri @rysiek

>incentive

Ok, if you watch the news, and as a result lose faith in humanity, does that mean the reporter on the news stole your faith in humanity?

@Wolf480pl
If I lose that faith because I recognize that reporters I trusted are lying for money, entertaining rather than reporting factual news, maybe.

If I'm hanging out with you while you bludgeon a store clerk to death with a baseball bat, am I going to be found guilty of murder, too, even if I never touched the guy?
@rysiek

@hollyjahangiri @rysiek
Well, that'd be bad, but I wouldn't call it stealing. More like framing.

We have different words for different evil deeds. No need to conflate them all with stealing.

@Wolf480pl
Now, now... It's not "framing." Don't weaken your "let's not conflate words" argument by calling it that.
@rysiek

@hollyjahangiri @rysiek maybe I misunderstood your example.

@Wolf480pl
In my example, the word is "accessory."

Which must be distinguished from "accomplice," since I said I never touched the clerk. Assuming I'm not lying (or committing perjury).
@rysiek

@hollyjahangiri @rysiek oh, I was thinkng the other way around:
That in that story, I'd be framing you, i.e. making you look liable for things you didn't do, IOW stealing your freedom. Especially if I ran away and you stayed.

@hollyjahangiri @rysiek
Which would still be not stealing IMO

@Wolf480pl
Of course it would be! At least in lay terms. Stealing my reputation, my freedom, the cost of lawyers, and possibly my life, you cad!!
@rysiek

@Wolf480pl
I am definitely never going shopping with you.
@rysiek

@hollyjahangiri @rysiek
I'm sorry you don't like considereing mental experiments.

@Wolf480pl
If you're going to leave me holding the bag, you're mental and that's hardly an "experiment" - it's a crime! Which crime, clearly, depends on the jurisdiction. But I'll be sitting here in my cell hoping they throw the book at you!
@rysiek

@hollyjahangiri
Hey, I didn't actually do anything to you. We were just considering hypothetical situations that I'd never do in real life. Besides, it was you who brought up the baseball bat scenario.

Tbh, I have no idea if you're being serious or not. The profile pic suggests you're not, and that you're speaking in a friendly voice, but changing profile pic to express emotions in a single conversation is not somethign people generally do...

I'm confused.

@hollyjahangiri
Also, I meant "thought experiment", sorry for poor choice of words.
English is not my native language.

@Wolf480pl
I changed my profile pic about 2 hours ago! Either way, I'm totally joking around with you about our little hypothetical "murder" (this is starting to feel way too much like moot court)...

@hollyjahangiri Good to know.

Anyway, my point of view is, it's impossible to steal an idea or a piece of information, because they're inherently non-exclusive.

The law may impose some restrictions on what you can do with information, eg. giving the author a form of monopoly on copying.
But it's very different from property.

It may be morally wrong to use information someone authored against their will, but it is for a different reason than stealing.

@Wolf480pl
You cannot copyright an idea, at least not in the U.S.

You can only copyright the artist's unique expression of it.

Also, while I am in favor of our copyright laws as they exist, without the excessively long postmortem protections courtesy of Mickey Mouse, and think we need easier/better enforcement, I also like DMCA and it's "safe harbor" provisions, and think it should be ONLY the rightful copyright owner's right to make a complaint.

@Wolf480pl
You put the onus on web hosting companies, and lesser known or unrepresented/unsigned artists won't get a chance to share or promote their work if they WANT to.

@hollyjahangiri
I know one can't copyright an idea.

One can patent the idea tho, and I'm not sure if I like it.
I definitely don't like the term "intellectual property" and the "copyright infridgement == stealing" rethoric.

I think DMCA safe harbour is pretty decent. It's a bit easy to abuse, but at least lets the defendant avoid legal fees if they don't want to fight.

@hollyjahangiri
OTOH, I like how fair use works in Poland - you can legally share music/videos/books/etc with friends and family. Downloading stuff that's already widely distributed is also legal, even if the party that provides you with the content is doing it illegaly. It's their fault, not yours.

@Wolf480pl
You really can't patent an idea, either. https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/can-you-patent-an-idea

@Wolf480pl
And please accept my apologies for not realizing there might be any language barriers!

@hollyjahangiri no. It is not theft. The same way it is not "rape", "murder", etc.

It's copyright infringement.

Words have meaning. Copyright infringement is not theft. It's copyright infringement.

@hollyjahangiri it can still be illegal, and immoral. But calling it something it isn't is not helping to clear up confusion and have an informed debate about copyright in the digital era.

A debate, I might add, we dearly need.

@rysiek
Fine. Sure, if we're talking about synonyms for different types of stealing and being pedantic about the legal definitions, I'll concede that point. 😂

@hollyjahangiri but theft and copyright infringement *are* different beasts. And this difference *is* important to how we deal with it in law, and in practice.

When somebody samples a 2s of a music track, and then uses it somewhere in the background of their DJ set to create a whole new song, how exactly did they "steal" anything from anyone?

Is the original author worse off because of the 2s sample?

Does the 2s sample influence the market for the original work?

@rysiek
Yes, but I'm used to arguing with teenagers who think copyright violation is something an artist should appreciate and be thankful for. I haven't dusted off the old law degree in years. It's hiding in the back of the closet being my wedding dress. 🤣

@hollyjahangiri It's not about legal degrees. It's about how do we want copyright to work. Will it stifle or encourage culture? Currently the only reason it's not stifling independent culture to a point of killing it is because enforcement is crap.

I'd much rather live in a world were copyright makes sense, so that enforcement would not kill independent creativity.

And to achieve that we need to not muddy the waters ourselves. Including when arguing with teenagers. They're going to vote soon.

@rysiek
Thank God for that.