Reply #176: Obviously.

[darkstar3]

They are treated differently by the police, by the courts, and by just about everyone I know, so yes, they must be different.

Think about this: It's criminal vs. civil. Shoplifting is an actual crime, often termed as petty theft, and is handled in criminal proceedings. Copyright infringement, on the other hand, is a tort, and is handled in civil proceedings.

The biggest difference is found in policing. The local|state|federal government is responsible for policing with regard to criminal activity. The allegedly injured party is responsible for policing in a civil case. You can't call the local cops when you find out that someone stole your patented or copyrighted idea. You have to go to court yourself.

And THAT is where the big problem lies. Conglomerates of publishing and recording companies, who give very little to the actual CREATORS, are trying to change it so that the government will be responsible for policing in civil matters. They are trying to rewrite the rules of the justice system to fit their own ends, and every time someone buys into the idea they're spreading that copyright infringement (a civil action) is the same as theft (a criminal action) they get one more tiny step closer to victory. And if they're successful, get ready to reap the whirlwind.

I hope one day to be a successful writer, and I support artists, and if you'll actually do some reading you'll find that many artists don't feel that the corporate conglomerates making noise about illegal downloading really speak for them. In fact, many musical artists feel that having their music available for download is great, because it lends them more exposure.

Go to the concerts and buy the schwag, and let the RIAA fuck off and die.

(BTW: Downloading different types of art, like music, movies, and written works, are different arguments due to different production methods, but that's an argument for another time.)