Intellectual Property

Having been through two law classes I can understand that precedent and liability make intellectual copyright infringement an open and shut case. A legal realist would say that the law is the law, and you have to follow it whether or not you agree with it because it's "the law" - the end product of our collective democratic process.

Of course with all the businesses that have a vested interest in strict interpretation of the law, the "punishment" doesn't usually fit the "crime" when an injured party decides to prosecute.

I would hope one day cases could be somehow subjective rather than hard law. Consider the following:

- Downloading a song you don't own from a major label artist.
- Downloading a song you don't own from a struggling independent artist (who doesn't give you explicit permission).

The intent of the "criminal" in these cases can be entirely circumstantial. In "try before you buy" business applications such as car purchases, a test drive usually isn't illegal. These may be the same as:

- Downloading a song to "try it out" - if you like it enough, you'll buy the CD.

What about digital equivalents of borrowing? People have been making copies of tapes for a while, this is no different:

- Copying a CD from a friend, or ripping a CD you own to your hard drive, and then giving the CD away

- Downloading another copy of a song you already own.

- Making music you own available online to share with a couple of friends.
- Making music you own publicly available on the Internet, such as through KazAa or Limewire.
- Creating and giving away "Mix CDs" of music you like to friends

Profiting of unauthorized duplicates is rightfully illegal:

- Creating and selling "Mix CDs" of music you like to anyone who wants to buy them

And never do anything to hurt local music stores:

- Shoplifting a CD from a store.