Internet Downloads

[Jarulf]

Filesharing is perfectly legal.  The content that people usually share, however, is not legal.
[right][snapback]78135[/snapback][/right]

Actually, content can't be legal or illegal at all. It is the action one do with it that at times can be illegal. Some type of copying is illegal. Some type of offering of the content to the public is illegal.

From what I can gather, sharing any copyrighted material is illegal.

Anything at all that says that you can share anything you want as long as it is private is telling a pretty bold-faced lie.

I did a quick search, but found nothing official that says the truth in either direction.  On the other hand, I have a slightly higher than basic knowledge of copyright laws, and I know one of the protections of the copyright law is that the material cannot be distributed without permission of the owner.  This is where the legal issues sit.

[right][snapback]78141[/snapback][/right]

You do realise that copyright law differ between countries don't you? Many countries have limitations on the exclusive rights the copyright holder has, and exceptions. For example, in Sweden it is allowed to make copies to family and close friends so yes, I can share it among my family for example.

I suppose it is the US copyright laww you have read? You do know that it also contain several exceptions and such that makes an otherwise infringing activity to not be so.

Heh, is possession of a copy of stolen property nearly the same as possession of stolen property?  In the case of software, movies, and music I would think so.
[right][snapback]78355[/snapback][/right]

First of, software, movies and music if you look at it as the "work" (which you get copyright to) is not property, so you can't make any such comparisions. They can be fixed into a tangible, physical, material form (a copy, see for example US copyright law linked below), that is property. Ownership of those copies is completely unrelated to ownership of the copyright. I can own a book, yet not the copyright to it. As for copyright, most every country that has such a law has no exclusivness of "ownership" to copies of the work, hence possession of a copy (no matter in what way it was done, infringing or not, is not infringement either.

It's an interesting twist in the way copyright law is constituted.  When you buy recorded media -- let's use Windows XP as an example -- there are two ways to look at it which are mutually exclusive.  The first is to look at is as "I have just bought these CDs, which contain software.  The CDs are mine to do with as I please."  Obviously, Microsoft wants nothing to do with this view of things, so they accept the second view: "I just bought a license to use Windows XP.  The software is on these CDs.  I can do whatever I need to do to ensure that I continue to have the use of the software I've licensed, so they can't stop me from copying the discs in case I lose the originals."
[right][snapback]78354[/snapback][/right]

You are confusing "sales" which are covered by sales or consumer sales laws, and copyright laws. Copyright only handles a few exclusives rights of the copyright holder and related things. Typically they cover copying, distribution and making it available to the public. That is is. Normal "use" is not an exclusive right of the copyright holder. hence you don't need any permision or license to use something. Sure, software creators might want you to believe differently, but that does not change the laws.

I have been reviewing some of the copyright laws and about the only one that is specific is regarding copying of software for the purposes of acrchiving.

[right][snapback]78486[/snapback][/right]

Your quoted section regards backups only (as part of the section 117). However, that is ONE of the cases only, clause 2. The first one allows it if it is "as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine". This removes the otherwise stupid (in my opinion), requiring special permision for copies created while running, installing or otherwise using a computer program. Many other countries have similar provisions, the swedish copyright law has and I can quote it if anyone is interested.

As for distribution, it depends on the definition.  There are many, including the RIAA and other similar groups, that would like to define this as any sort of distribution, be it a single  copy or thousands.  On the other hand, there are large groups that have a more lax definition, and much more vague.  Gifts given among friends may not be distribution, though there is no definied line to these people.
[right][snapback]78509[/snapback][/right]

But then, the important thing is what the LAW defines it as. In general, I would say that in most countries, it is distribution to the public that is not allowed, that it is often allowed to family and friends. It is often irellevant if you distribute 1 or 1000 copies though (although the peanlties and such can vary). COuntries that allows it for family and friends may also have restrictions on the number of copies, so even if you have a 100 member family, it would be to much.

The copyright owner has the right to make copies of his work and distribute it as he sees fit.  The consumer does not.  The consumer is normally allowed to transfer the ownership of his copy, not new copies of the work.
[right][snapback]78683[/snapback][/right]

Not completely true (about the copying), almost any countries copyright law allow some copying in various cases that are not considered infringement. So one can't make a blanket statement that "no copying allowed by consumers".




As promised, a link to US copyright law:

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/

And for your swedish lurkers out there, here is the current swedish one:

http://www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19600729.HTM