Is there a difference between "sharing" and piracy?

Question

Such as a difference in penalty, and the arguments against them?

When I say 'sharing' I mean that thing where one person rips a song off a cd he/she bought and gives it to a pal. or where you rip it in the same way simply for yourself. Similar to what is done in piracy, but without any cash or payment involved.

Answer 1

This is a good question. I wish I could answer it more fully.

I don't know the exact legal details and judicial precedent, but I know that generally intellectual property is never absolute. In fact, the general idea behind intellectual property as it has been implement (a concept that really began to gain traction after the invention of the printing press and especially in the 18th century - e.g., included in the US Constitution) was fairly utilitarian - ideas ultimately belong mankind, but that an incentive existed in a limited time monopoly on profits*. This monopoly is not absolute either, as there are categories of allowed actions called "fair use." For example, parody is considered fair use, which is why SNL can use a real Fox News logo if they're mocking Fox News. There's also an exemption for commentary or reference, which means a book critic can quote from a book or the Daily Show can replay Fox News clips.

As for "sharing" vs "pirating" media, my understanding is that this is something that is determined in a court, but that sharing with your immediate friends and family has been either protected by courts under fair use OR never pursued legally. Before the Internet, the technologies involved limited the ability to share with too many people. People have been used to the ability to copy a tape or a CD for several decades.

I haven't been following this space, but my understanding is that different DRM schemes take different approaches, some more draconian than others. My impression is that a successful DRM strategy will allow some form of sharing that we find "normal."

* - To patent something, you actually have to tell the world (via a patent filing) what your invention/idea is. With copyright, there is no similar need to officially register (protection is implicit, as long as you prove when you designed/wrote/produced the work), but one would assume that publishing a written work or a piece of music would in fact also "reveal" it. Once your copyright or patent expires, anyone else can use it.

Because of this, I understand Coca Cola chose not to patent their recipe and instead maintain it as a company secret. Courts afford secrets respect, such that if you can prove that someone stole the recipe... that would be illegal. BUT if someone independently came up with the recipe, Coke would be in big trouble. My understanding is that the third party could even patent it.

Answer 2

Yes, and what the recording industry calls piracy is actually legal sharing. Piracy requires the "pirates" to make money from something they don't own.

The only legal battles have been in civil courts where you can sue anyone for anything and the recording industry has the most lawyers to throw at the cases.

Answer 3

I do not use P2P programs for personal reasons. To me, it is theft, plain and simple. But I don't preach to others, I'm not their Dad, my kids already know not to do this. Anything a person creates of an artistic nature is their property until they either give it away or sell it. Think in terms of a painting. Would you help yourself to an artists paintings? I doubt it. Just because the material in question is digital, does not make it any less a theft.

But that's a moral question for individuals to answer for themselves.

Sharing. I make backup copies of my music and movies. My family members, as well as a few friends do borrow them. That is sharing. If they make a copy of my copy to keep, well, technically, that is theft.

Answer 4

piracy is a generic term, ie pirating software etc... maritime piracy is a specific form of piracy

Answer 5

Sharing is for personal use and it is usually legal while piracy is illegal because it is for commercial use.

Answer 6

If there is any difference I guess the lawyers have come up with some fully good b/s as usual. Yeah come to think of it as long as its musos getting screwed while sleazy colledge students fabricate top dollar lies.....there must be a million arguments to distort the obvious.

Answer 7

If you were an artist what would your answer be? People are sharing your music without the right to.