An Open Letter to Photography Thieves

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

But I have no idea on how to fix it.

"Alan Turing proved in 1936 that a general algorithm to solve the halting problem for all possible program-input pairs cannot exist."

There are, it seems, some things that can't be fixed. Perhaps it is best to accept that and get on with those things that can be fixed?

The evil Professor Rotweiller and his assistant EcclesKuchen, faced with yet another unsolvable problem that defeats their nefarious plans!

 

[dbarnes]

There have been numerous RFF threads about this.

One thing that I think is valuable from them is the notion that it's hard to get through to someone whom you're calling a thief if that person doesn't think of himself as a thief. He's more likely to just tune you out.

Of course, it may feel good to rant.

If the point is to encourage a revelatory change of self image in that person, great. But success strikes me as unlikely.

 

[sig]

How is copyright violation NOT stealing? It is stealing the right to use a picture, a legally defensible right. Or believe that only material goods can be stolen?

Cheers,

R.

Would you please be a gentleman and tell me where in the world a copyright infringement is the same as stealing?

Thanks

 

[x-ray]

Welfare mostly. And I steal food and clothes from stores when I need them. I don't really believe in private property at all.

I hope you're just kidding???

For those that live by theft they deserve the full support of their community. I believe these free thinking folks should be fed and house at the expense of those that can afford it through their tax dollars. They should be fed and a roof over their heads with bars around them in a nice comfortable jail cell. 😱

 

[j j]

It is complex and not always consistent; every country has different rules - in Britian a photographer won an infringement case because a photo of his was 'recreated', a b&w backdrop of buckingham palace with a colour red double decker. Because the new image looked too close to the 'original', the second photographer was found to be infringing. This has set a bad precedent in Britian where one man now essentially "owns" the idea of a red bus in front of a b&w buckingham palace.

It's a good story but not true. It was Westminster Bridge looking towards Big Ben and no one "owns" the idea. It was an argument about product packaging/branding of products that were sold side-by-side in tourist shops. You can take pics of buses and grey out the remainder if you wish but if you wrap them around stuff to sell to tourists someone might tell you to stop.

 

[hepcat]

Would you please be a gentleman and tell me where in the world a copyright infringement is the same as stealing?

Thanks

Although my first name IS Roger, I am not Mr. Hicks. And although I'm entirely certain that he is competent to answer the question for you, I will undertake to explain it as well.

First, items that can be copyrighted are called "intellectual property." Property, can in fact, be stolen. The statutes in California, for example, even cover "theft of real property by severance."

However, back to intellectual property, if I own the rights to an image and someone else publishes it without paying royalties to which I am entitled, they have deprived me of income that is rightfully mine. If THEY fraudulently accept royalties that should be mine, it's compounded. Unfortunately, copyright infringement is a civil violation rather than the arrest-able criminal violation of theft, but the result of the unlawaful deprivation of income/property has the same result. In the event they accept MY royalties, though, depending on the jurisdiction, criminal fraud charges may apply.

 

[Sid836]

Dear Nikos,

Very true. But equally, some people think, "It isn't really stealing if..." They are probably the only ones this "open letter" will affect.

Cheers,

R.

Totally agree with this!

 

[Jamie123]

How is copyright violation NOT stealing? It is stealing the right to use a picture, a legally defensible right. Or believe that only material goods can be stolen?

Cheers,

R.

I happen to be of the opinion that copyright infringement is not stealing. Mind you, I'm not saying it's not bad, but it's different.

The concept of ownership itself is already somewhat of an abstract idea and ownership of immaterial goods is a purely legal construct. I'm not a legal expert but it is not the case that the law in most countries distinguishes beetween theft of material goods and copyright infringement. If so, then it seems quite clear from a legal point of view that copyright is not stealing. In certain cases of abuse we might also say that someone's dignity was stolen but I think we all know right away that we're not talking about literal theft.
So if we leave the legal discussion behind it basically comes down to how far you want to stretch the metaphor of stealing. But instead of treating this as a question of semantics some people treat it as a question of ethics. I suspect this is deeply rooted in some Judeo-Christian thou-shalt-not-steal thinking which makes a legal transgression more severe by framing it as being in violation of the Ten Commandments. But this only matters if you believe in them. If not that it's utterly meaningless. I'm somewhat of an Atheist but also try to act according to my own moral beliefs. If my actions hurt other people then it really doesn't matter what you want to call them, they're bad either way.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

If my actions hurt other people then it really doesn't matter what you want to call them, they're bad either way.

...and that, when you come right down to it, is the Law and the Prophets.

All else, in my opinion, is simply special pleading and hypocrisy.

:angel:

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . Would you please be a gentleman and tell me where in the world a copyright infringement is the same as stealing?

Everywhere.

Sure, you can quote statutes limiting theft to "intention permanently to deprive". But a really simple definition of theft, to which most of us can relate, is taking something that doesn't belong to you, and using it as your own.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sig]

so basically, since you think it is stealing it is stealing, even if it is not......

 

[bobbyrab]

so basically, since you think it is stealing it is stealing, even if it is not......

For clarity it would be a good idea to actually put forward what you do actually think otherwise you waste everybody's time.

So why is is it not theft, and where is it not illegal?

 

[sig]

It is not theft because it is a copyright infringement. It is not the same thing.

 

[dogbunny]

It is not theft because a key component of the concept of theft is the idea of depriving someone of something that they already possess. Those who think copyright infringement is theft are of the mind that copyright infringers are depriving them of future or potential earnings -- that is depriving them of something that they don't yet possess. It may be unscrupulous, but it isn't theft and laws around the world support that idea.

 

[Coopersounds]

It is not theft because it is a copyright infringement. It is not the same thing.

The law in Australia and the USA see the difference. They are classified as different to theft.

 

[Roger Hicks]

It is not theft because it is a copyright infringement. It is not the same thing.

WHY is it not the same thing, using the definition I gave earlier? Do you dispute that it is theft to take something that belongs to someone else, and use it as your own?

To turn your argument back on itself, you're saying "It's not theft because I say it isn't".

Vheers,

R.

 

[sig]

WHY is it not the same thing, using the definition I gave earlier? Do you dispute that it is theft to take something that belongs to someone else, and use it as your own?

To turn your argument back on itself, you're saying "It's not theft because I say it isn't".

Vheers,

R.

bolded: Yes it is because I say it isn't or it is not the same because the law say it is not the same.... you can choose.

 

[Roger Hicks]

bolded: Yes it is because I say it isn't or it is not the same because the law say it is not the same.... you can choose.

"When justice is against you, plead the law. When the law is against you, plead justice." Cicero, as I recall.

Justice is against you.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sig]

Ok, justice is against me.

Just for saying it a copyright infringement is not the same as stealing. Justice is cruel.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

"When justice is against you, plead the law. When the law is against you, plead justice." Cicero, as I recall.

Justice is against you.

Cicero was neither a nice nor a wise man, in my opinion and, though I can't find the reference, that seems to me just the sort of inane statement he would have made.

I agree with Sig and the others, who have been pointing out the different between theft and infringement. Neither is appropriate behaviour but one is dealt with by the socially sanctioned forces of the law and the other is left to the person, who believes themselves to have suffered loss, to deal with.

I find it interesting that, despite the efforts of both the rich and the famous, legislators have stubbornly refused to make infringement a criminal act. Many legislations have, however, criminalised the effects of some forms of infringement, such as selling methanol under the brand names of legitimate distilleries.