Copyright in its current form is incompatible with private communication of any kind through computers, because computers by their nature make copies of the communication, so it makes any private communication through a computer into a potential crime, depending on its content. The logic of copyright enforcement, therefore, demands access to all such communications in order to investigate their legality, much like the Stasi.
Inevitably such a far-reaching state power will be abused for prurient purposes, for the sexual titillation of the investigators, and to suppress political dissent.
This is a ludicrous assertion and factually inaccurate beyond all practical intelligence.
A computer in service of an individual absolutely follows copyright because the creator is in control of the distribution and direction of the content.
Besides, copyright is a civil statute, not criminal. Everything about this comment is the most obtuse form of FUD possible. I’m pro copyright reform, but this is “Uncle off his meds ranting on Facebook” unhinged and shouldn’t be given credence whatsoever.
> A computer in service of an individual absolutely follows copyright because the creator is in control of the distribution and direction of the content.
I don’t understand what means. A computer in service of an individual turns copyright law into mattress tag removal law—practically unenforceable.
None of that is correct. Some of it is not even wrong, demonstrating an unbelievably profound ignorance of its topic. Furthermore, it is gratuitously insulting.
> Besides, copyright is a civil statute, not criminal
Nope. https://www.justia.com/intellectual-property/copyright/crimi...