(no title)
photonerd | 2 years ago
I’m sympathetic to the moral argument you’re making—though when the raw goods are digital too I think it’s an impractical & ill conceived one—but both legally AND linguistically… it’s incorrect
photonerd | 2 years ago
I’m sympathetic to the moral argument you’re making—though when the raw goods are digital too I think it’s an impractical & ill conceived one—but both legally AND linguistically… it’s incorrect
autoexec|2 years ago
This is all really pretty simple: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4
Also, (at least in the US) legally copyright infringement is distinct from stealing.
ben_w|2 years ago
Also, from https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/take
Verb, 1, To get into one's hands, possession, or control, with or without force.
stcg|2 years ago
Are you then saying that when Bob sends another copy to Charlie, Bob is taking something? What is Bob taking?
photonerd|2 years ago
Bob is the distributor in this context however. In most Berne convention states he broke copyright law (technically, but nothing would happen)
Together Bob & Charlie gained or acquired a picture produced by Alice’s work effort that was unauthorized.
That’s stealing. Is it a big deal? Probably not. Still stealing.