18 ms·

Theft and stealing are legal terms in criminal law. Copyright infringement is a different term, mostly in civil law in fact. (To be fair there is such a thing a

Theft and stealing are legal terms in criminal law. Copyright infringement is a different term, mostly in civil law in fact. (To be fair there is such a thing as criminal copyright infringement, it's just a less common thing) If you're interpreting things strictly in legal terms: Copying is not Theft. +edit: (And much copying is in fact explicitly permitted, in which case it's even more clearly something else. Case in point: This video is CC-BY-SA: You are permitted to copy this particular video, provided you credit it to Nina Paley et al. , and extend similar terms to people who would copy it from you)

PurpleRamen 3y ago
It would say that depends on the country and how they phrase their laws. But ok, quite likely, is it not literal theft, by law. But those discussions are also not about the literal usage of the word, but the spirit and understanding of the act.
- Kim_Bruning 3y ago
  If you're saying that it's actually a very nuanced discussion, (even -or especially- when it comes to the law), then I'll take it! Note that much of the world has signed the Berne convention[1], and thus most countries tend to have similar laws when it comes to copyright. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention
bumby 3y ago
"This video is CC-BY-SA... There is a very different aspect going on here: the author acknowledges and approved of this licensing arrangement. If I allow you to copy my proprietary, trade-secret autonomous self-driving software, there is nothing wrong with that. If you illegally copy it without my consent, there is. The whole point is the act of copying without consent of the owner. Adhering to licensing agreements is a different point entirely.
- Kim_Bruning 3y ago
  That's exactly right. In many cases, it's not a problem. In your hypothetical case, it's a civil matter. Either way, it's not theft. (And CC is imho a bit more than merely another (set of) licensing agreement(s). It sets up an alternate ecosystem where copying is beneficial. It has been set up by people who disagree with the erosion of the copyright system that happened in the 20th century.)
  - bumby 3y ago
    It’s likely a criminal problem in that scenario, because stealing trade secrets is generally done for profit.
    - Kim_Bruning 3y ago
      Oh wait, you said trade secret. Previously I was discussing copyrights, since that is what the video is about. My statements above do hold for copyrighted information. Unlike copyrights, trade secrets are a not something I come across very often, so I'll politely bow out and defer to your expertise on that particular topic.
      - bumby 3y ago
        I don’t claim any expertise outside of once upon a time taking an engineering law course. But my discussion has mainly been about the larger umbrella of intellectual property. In this case, the US generally considers infringement of intellectual property with the intent to enrich oneself to be a criminal matter. It can be copyright, patents, trade secrets etc. I mentioned trade secrets because the example was stealing self driving car tech, which has had relatively recent examples of that very thing.

PurpleRamen 3y ago

It would say that depends on the country and how they phrase their laws. But ok, quite likely, is it not literal theft, by law. But those discussions are also not about the literal usage of the word, but the spirit and understanding of the act.

Kim_Bruning 3y ago
If you're saying that it's actually a very nuanced discussion, (even -or especially- when it comes to the law), then I'll take it! Note that much of the world has signed the Berne convention[1], and thus most countries tend to have similar laws when it comes to copyright. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention

bumby 3y ago

"This video is CC-BY-SA... There is a very different aspect going on here: the author acknowledges and approved of this licensing arrangement. If I allow you to copy my proprietary, trade-secret autonomous self-driving software, there is nothing wrong with that. If you illegally copy it without my consent, there is. The whole point is the act of copying without consent of the owner. Adhering to licensing agreements is a different point entirely.

Kim_Bruning 3y ago
That's exactly right. In many cases, it's not a problem. In your hypothetical case, it's a civil matter. Either way, it's not theft. (And CC is imho a bit more than merely another (set of) licensing agreement(s). It sets up an alternate ecosystem where copying is beneficial. It has been set up by people who disagree with the erosion of the copyright system that happened in the 20th century.)
- bumby 3y ago
  It’s likely a criminal problem in that scenario, because stealing trade secrets is generally done for profit.
  - Kim_Bruning 3y ago
    Oh wait, you said trade secret. Previously I was discussing copyrights, since that is what the video is about. My statements above do hold for copyrighted information. Unlike copyrights, trade secrets are a not something I come across very often, so I'll politely bow out and defer to your expertise on that particular topic.
    - bumby 3y ago
      I don’t claim any expertise outside of once upon a time taking an engineering law course. But my discussion has mainly been about the larger umbrella of intellectual property. In this case, the US generally considers infringement of intellectual property with the intent to enrich oneself to be a criminal matter. It can be copyright, patents, trade secrets etc. I mentioned trade secrets because the example was stealing self driving car tech, which has had relatively recent examples of that very thing.