|
No one is disputing that copyright infringement (which, legally, is not theft, that's a different offense) isn't illegal, because it is, plain and simple. However, I should probably say, right now, that unlike theft, copyright infringment is not a crime. In case you aren't aware, something can be illegal but not a crime. For instance, marjiuana is illegal in Canada but not a crime. Okay, that's not a good example, I just thought I'd add that one in for humour's sake 'cause that situation is pretty funny. Anyway, you can tell copyright infringment is not a crime 'cause no one is going to jail. Instead, they are being sued. You don't sue someone who is stealing, you prosecute them and they go to jail because it is a crime. You don't prosecute copyright infringers (pirates are something different) because what they're doing is not a crime. It is illegal, so you can sue them and they can be forced to pay a settlement (money).
Anyway, this isn't the point, just something interesting.
The point is whether P2P should be legal or not. It can be used to do illegal things, but so can many other things. A knife can kill someone, a much serious offense than mere copyright infringement, but we don't outlaw it. So, why would anyone outlaw P2P, where the worst thing you can do is infringe on someone's copyright? It has a perfectly legal and legitimate use: the sharing of files. How can you make this illegal? Yet, this is exactly what the RIAA are trying to do and everything else they're doing is only them trying to compensate for their inability to do so...
|