The key problem is that copyright infringement by a private individual is regarded by the court as something so serious that it negates the right to privacy. It’s a sign of the twisted values that copyright has succeeded on imposing on many legal systems. It equates the mere copying of a digital file with serious crimes that merit a prison sentence, an evident absurdity.

This is a good example of how copyright’s continuing obsession with ownership and control of digital material is warping the entire legal system in the EU. What was supposed to be simply a fair way of rewarding creators has resulted in a monstrous system of routine government surveillance carried out on hundreds of millions of innocent people just in case they copy a digital file.

  • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    You don’t know what you’re talking about and I’m not going to respond to your arguments that you yourself don’t even understand. Contracts of employment don’t have anything to do with copyright. In your own example Amazon owns the IP because they bought it. Something your commie brain wouldn’t understand I guess.

    • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Oh I understand it alright, but how is “Amazon owns the IP” a protection of the artist?