5 ms·

Strictly speaking, it's uploading that people get sued for, not downloading. You can download all that you want from Z-Library or BitTorrent, as long as you do

Strictly speaking, it's uploading that people get sued for, not downloading. You can download all that you want from Z-Library or BitTorrent, as long as you don't share back. And indexing copyrighted material for search is safe, or at least ambiguous.

capableweb 3y ago
Carefully speaking, what you say is true in many places (countries), but also not true in other places (countries). Some jurisdictions are different, as always.
MisterBastahrd 3y ago
Downloading is illegal. That people do not normally get sued or prosecuted for downloading does not mean that they cannot get sued or prosecuted.
- magoghm 3y ago
  It is distribution of copyrighted material without permission of the author that is illegal, when you download you're not distributing so it isn't illegal (unless you're using something like BitTorrent that also distributes it while you're downloading it).
  - tzs 3y ago
    In the US permission is required to make copies, prepare derivative works, distribute copies, publicly perform the work, or publicly display the work [1]. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106
    - jazzyjackson 3y ago
      Right, the question is, when my computer requests a file from your computer, which one of us is "making a copy" ? It becomes less ambiguous to ask who is doing the publishing. In a physical analogy, if someone is selling bootleg DVDs on the street, I don't think anyone ever got busted for being a customer.
      - tzs 3y ago
        Note that you can't really do much with a downloaded file that is just sitting there on the disk or whatever that you downloaded it onto. Using it is likely to make a copy into RAM. If the case of computer programs making such a copy does not require permission because of 17 USC 117 [1], which says that the owner of a copy of a computer program can make copies or adaptations if they are created as an essential step in utilizing the program and they are used in no other manner. For digital downloads other than computer programs 17 USC 117 does not apply, and so copying to RAM to use the download would in theory be infringement. You probably won't get sued over it of course so its nothing to lose sleep over. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117
      - bryans 3y ago
        > Right, the question is, when my computer requests a file from your computer, which one of us is "making a copy" ? It becomes less ambiguous to ask who is doing the publishing. That question is irrelevant in a discussion about legality, because it doesn't matter who physically made the copy at the time of transfer. It only matters if the first party has the legal rights to distribute it, which they don't. Since you are knowingly taking possession of copyrighted property that they don't have the rights to, then you have now violated the copyright by obtaining an illegal reproduction. > In a physical analogy, if someone is selling bootleg DVDs on the street, I don't think anyone ever got busted for being a customer. Just because you don't get arrested for purchasing a bootleg DVD, doesn't make it legal. Not all illegal things involve arrest or prosecution. Lots of illegal things can only result in civil lawsuits. This is one of those things. The reason the seller of the bootleg DVDs can be arrested, is because the cities where bootleg sales are most common have laws specifically targeting the advertisement and sale of copyrighted works that were reproduced illegally. If you buy one, you're still violating the copyright and the MPAA could file a lawsuit if they had any evidence of your purchase and felt it was worth their time.
    - polski-g 3y ago
      As far as the downloader is aware, the uploader has rights to do those things.
- baobabKoodaa 3y ago
  Is illegal where? Certainly not over here in Finland.
  - bryans 3y ago
    You say that very confidently, but you are very wrong. If you download music from a source that does not have a license to distribute that music, then they are violating the copyright and you are now in possession of stolen property. Finland uses different terminology for Fair Use, but the citations amount to the same as US policy and only apply if you obtained the work by legal means. Chapter 28: Theft https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039_19951010.pdf https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039_199... Chapter 2, Section 12: Reproduction https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1961/en19610404.pdf https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1961/en19610404.pdf
    - baobabKoodaa 3y ago
      Huh, looks like you are partially correct. Apparently the law was changed in 2015. Before 2015 it was legal to download copies of music from the internet. You are wrong regarding the copy of music being considered "stolen property" and your citation "Chapter 28: Theft" does not support your position. It lists many different types of theft NONE of the types of "theft" included there are in any way related to piracy or music. You are right regarding that obtaining a copy of a song is apparently illegal.
moralestapia 3y ago
Huh? No.

capableweb 3y ago

Carefully speaking, what you say is true in many places (countries), but also not true in other places (countries). Some jurisdictions are different, as always.

MisterBastahrd 3y ago

Downloading is illegal. That people do not normally get sued or prosecuted for downloading does not mean that they cannot get sued or prosecuted.

magoghm 3y ago
It is distribution of copyrighted material without permission of the author that is illegal, when you download you're not distributing so it isn't illegal (unless you're using something like BitTorrent that also distributes it while you're downloading it).
- tzs 3y ago
  In the US permission is required to make copies, prepare derivative works, distribute copies, publicly perform the work, or publicly display the work [1]. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106
  - jazzyjackson 3y ago
    Right, the question is, when my computer requests a file from your computer, which one of us is "making a copy" ? It becomes less ambiguous to ask who is doing the publishing. In a physical analogy, if someone is selling bootleg DVDs on the street, I don't think anyone ever got busted for being a customer.
    - tzs 3y ago
      Note that you can't really do much with a downloaded file that is just sitting there on the disk or whatever that you downloaded it onto. Using it is likely to make a copy into RAM. If the case of computer programs making such a copy does not require permission because of 17 USC 117 [1], which says that the owner of a copy of a computer program can make copies or adaptations if they are created as an essential step in utilizing the program and they are used in no other manner. For digital downloads other than computer programs 17 USC 117 does not apply, and so copying to RAM to use the download would in theory be infringement. You probably won't get sued over it of course so its nothing to lose sleep over. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117
    - bryans 3y ago
      > Right, the question is, when my computer requests a file from your computer, which one of us is "making a copy" ? It becomes less ambiguous to ask who is doing the publishing. That question is irrelevant in a discussion about legality, because it doesn't matter who physically made the copy at the time of transfer. It only matters if the first party has the legal rights to distribute it, which they don't. Since you are knowingly taking possession of copyrighted property that they don't have the rights to, then you have now violated the copyright by obtaining an illegal reproduction. > In a physical analogy, if someone is selling bootleg DVDs on the street, I don't think anyone ever got busted for being a customer. Just because you don't get arrested for purchasing a bootleg DVD, doesn't make it legal. Not all illegal things involve arrest or prosecution. Lots of illegal things can only result in civil lawsuits. This is one of those things. The reason the seller of the bootleg DVDs can be arrested, is because the cities where bootleg sales are most common have laws specifically targeting the advertisement and sale of copyrighted works that were reproduced illegally. If you buy one, you're still violating the copyright and the MPAA could file a lawsuit if they had any evidence of your purchase and felt it was worth their time.
  - polski-g 3y ago
    As far as the downloader is aware, the uploader has rights to do those things.
baobabKoodaa 3y ago
Is illegal where? Certainly not over here in Finland.
- bryans 3y ago
  You say that very confidently, but you are very wrong. If you download music from a source that does not have a license to distribute that music, then they are violating the copyright and you are now in possession of stolen property. Finland uses different terminology for Fair Use, but the citations amount to the same as US policy and only apply if you obtained the work by legal means. Chapter 28: Theft https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039_19951010.pdf https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039_199... Chapter 2, Section 12: Reproduction https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1961/en19610404.pdf https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1961/en19610404.pdf
  - baobabKoodaa 3y ago
    Huh, looks like you are partially correct. Apparently the law was changed in 2015. Before 2015 it was legal to download copies of music from the internet. You are wrong regarding the copy of music being considered "stolen property" and your citation "Chapter 28: Theft" does not support your position. It lists many different types of theft NONE of the types of "theft" included there are in any way related to piracy or music. You are right regarding that obtaining a copy of a song is apparently illegal.

moralestapia 3y ago

Huh? No.