The key problem is that copyright infringement by a private individual is regarded by the court as something so serious that it negates the right to privacy. It’s a sign of the twisted values that copyright has succeeded on imposing on many legal systems. It equates the mere copying of a digital file with serious crimes that merit a prison sentence, an evident absurdity.

This is a good example of how copyright’s continuing obsession with ownership and control of digital material is warping the entire legal system in the EU. What was supposed to be simply a fair way of rewarding creators has resulted in a monstrous system of routine government surveillance carried out on hundreds of millions of innocent people just in case they copy a digital file.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    59
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I guess you subscribe to the theory that if you aren’t doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide? Better hope you have the right state sanctioned religion when a right wing government takes over some day.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      486 months ago

      Just to back you up:

      https://mullvad.net/en/why-privacy-matters

      “The most common argument used in defense of mass surveillance is ‘If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear’. Try saying that to women in the US states where abortion has suddenly become illegal. Say it to investigative journalists in authoritarian countries. Saying ‘I have nothing to hide’ means you stop caring about anyone fighting for their freedom. And one day, you might be one of them.”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        26 months ago

        Exactly.

        If something can’t be done in a privacy respecting way, perhaps it shouldn’t be done. Copyright should be something the rights holder makes a claim against, enforcement shouldn’t be automatic. If that makes copyright unenforceable, then that’s too bad I guess.