I never could get what the big confusion is all about or what "fine line" there is to it. I don't understand why there is even a debate about this. And this "stealing" marketing from the industries is utter crap.
The issue with stealing:
People come up with examples like stealing someone car from the public parking lot. First of all, when downloading, nothing was stolen. Then they go on to say the owner's intellectual property was stolen. No it wasn't stolen, because the owner(s) still have it. It was copied. If you leave designs for some product that is guaranteed to net you all the money in the world, and you left it in the public library, and someone COPIES it and makes all the money in the world, too bad for you. Nothing was stolen. On the other hand, if you had it at home and they broke in and STOLE it, now something is stolen.
What if it was taken:
If it was taken from the public library where you left it, it still wasn't stolen because it was in public domain. If you leave your car unlocked in the public parking lot with the key in the ignition, and someone drives off with it, you're stupid, you don't deserve to own a car, and it sucks to be you. Maybe that guy shouldn't even be charged with a crime, unless he intended to steal it. I mean, maybe he thought you were giving it away, you know? People are stupid and weird. I don't think you should have any right to the vehicle if he doesn't want to give it back either.
How does this relate to the internet:
If you share your files on your pc, and you hook yourself up to the public internet, like the idiots in the dorms at college, and people view your private (yeah right, it's like changing clothes with the blinds open), too bad for you. And if you happen to be dumb enough to not make your files read only, and someone deletes your term paper before you printed it, and you really want to kill them, too bad. But like the car issue above, I don't think this could be done without malicious intent.
Back on topic:
Basically, people who share music are the only ones at fault. Even more so with movies. Well, music CDs don't come with a license agreement in them, but movies do start with the FBI warning about public presentations. Sharing them, is public presentation. Downloading them cause someone's sharing them? Hey just cause the neighbor likes to watch porn via projector on his front lawn, doesn't mean the kids next door should get in trouble for joining the party. I mean talk about misleading. Downloading is stealing? No way. Sharing is stealing. I think there has been too much emphasis on sharing is caring.
What are the consequences:
Well you know, Mr. Lawyer, I wanted to be friends with everyone. It's okay to watch a movie with my friends right? It's okay to loan my friend that new CD right? It's okay to lend my friend's CD to my other friend right? right?! Oh wait, no, my friend has to go buy the CD, and even then, he can't borrow mine. Darn, I can't watch movies with my friend, we'd have to watch seperately. Can I atleast have them on the phone? Pwweassseeee. Oh wait, the soundtrack is intellectual property too, damn it.
Are there solutions:
Only if everything were reversed. Instead of the producers and the studios footing the bill, the public would have to. Or think of it this way, almost like only stockholders can use the intellectual property, and no sharing with non-stockholders! Gotta sign the contract before you buy any stock. But people want options, so maybe we should have elections. Proposal to the people, the people vote, they put in their money, and someone follows through with the promise. Oh wait that sounds like our government, and it doesn't seem to be working too well either! There seems to be some confusion over following through with promises. We're fucked.
