Ultimately, the biggest issue with copywrong is this: on a rather fundamental level computers operate by copying, not moving. I mean: even the MOV instruction o

Ultimately, the biggest issue with copywrong is this: on a rather fundamental level computers operate by copying, not moving. I mean: even the MOV instruction on most (if not all) instruction set copies data without overwriting the original. RAM (tends to) have non-destructive reads. The processor caches everywhere. Etc. Sure, you could potentially talk about fixation as opposed to temporary copies - but that boundary is fuzzy and getting fuzzier all the time. What happens when the process gets paged to disk? What happens if the process crashes and dumps a crash report? Or worse - when memsistor RAM starts becoming available? Also, there's a related problem as to whom takes responsibility for a machine doing something. What happens when you walk by a security camera with a copywronged painting? If you visit webpage A that contains an iframe pointing to website B containing copywronged work, who is responsible for the copywrong infringement? Is it you? You own the computer. But you never did anything that you could have known was a violation. Is it the person who wrote your web browser, as they were the person who wrote the instructions to follow iframes? Is it the person who wrote webpage A? But they didn't ever actually do anything infringing - they provided instructions which if followed without checking copywrong restrictions would potentially be a violation. Personally, the entire idea of "intellectual property" is fundamentally misguided, but that is another matter.