4 ms·
Charlie certainly was (he took a copy from Bob). Bob is the distributor in this context however. In most Berne convention states he broke copyright law (techni
by photonerd 3y ago
Charlie certainly was (he took a copy from Bob).
Bob is the distributor in this context however. In most Berne convention states he broke copyright law (technically, but nothing would happen)
Together Bob & Charlie gained or acquired a picture produced by Alice’s work effort that was unauthorized.
That’s stealing. Is it a big deal? Probably not. Still stealing.
- Nursie 3y agoAlice still has it, so it’s not stealing as commonly understood. I’d say the opposite - it could still be a huge deal to Alice, but it doesn’t meet the definition of stealing or theft.
- jdright 3y agoas you said, he broke copyright law. that is copyright infringement, it is not theft.
- kthejoker2 3y agoSo close and then the stealing part slipped back in. We have a separate term already for the right to copy something - copyright. We have a term for copying something without that right- copyright infringement. Not theft. Copyright infringement.