Posted by: ne0 October 30, 2014
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
Metta you said "In Nepal, you could be charged for stealing if you happen to own stolen products (e.g. stolen gold property)."
That is an accurate statement but stolen goods and stolen digital goods dont have same ramification since stolen good has only one instance while digital goods can be reproduced unlimited amount of times and distributed.
I truly believe that copyrighted material should be respected and due credit be given. But, for comparision sake, let's discuss this scenario.
Person A steals a truckload of copyrighted rice from Person B.
Person A opens up a store A (site) and gives half the bag of rice to person C saying this is for free there is no copyright. The store A is still giving out free rice to anyone who asks for it.
Person C opens a store C (site) and gives out rice freely to anyone who wants it saying he got it freely from a free store and that there is no copyright to it. The store C is still giving out free rice to anyone who asks for it. It so happens that Person Z also wants to try out free stuff but Person Z happens to be a famous personality.
By now thousands of people have gotten free rice and Store A and Store C are still giving out free rice to anyone who asks for it.
Person B sees the famous Person Z with his rice and decides to blame him for stealing his rice. Person Z points to Store C where he got the rice for free. Also the fact that Store A is also giving out the rice for free is revealed.
Now should person B keep accusing Person Z of 'stealing' the rice or file legal procedures against Store A/Person A for stealing and distributing his copyrighted rice for free?
That is an accurate statement but stolen goods and stolen digital goods dont have same ramification since stolen good has only one instance while digital goods can be reproduced unlimited amount of times and distributed.
I truly believe that copyrighted material should be respected and due credit be given. But, for comparision sake, let's discuss this scenario.
Person A steals a truckload of copyrighted rice from Person B.
Person A opens up a store A (site) and gives half the bag of rice to person C saying this is for free there is no copyright. The store A is still giving out free rice to anyone who asks for it.
Person C opens a store C (site) and gives out rice freely to anyone who wants it saying he got it freely from a free store and that there is no copyright to it. The store C is still giving out free rice to anyone who asks for it. It so happens that Person Z also wants to try out free stuff but Person Z happens to be a famous personality.
By now thousands of people have gotten free rice and Store A and Store C are still giving out free rice to anyone who asks for it.
Person B sees the famous Person Z with his rice and decides to blame him for stealing his rice. Person Z points to Store C where he got the rice for free. Also the fact that Store A is also giving out the rice for free is revealed.
Now should person B keep accusing Person Z of 'stealing' the rice or file legal procedures against Store A/Person A for stealing and distributing his copyrighted rice for free?