That doesn't sound right. Here is my understanding, with the usual caveats that IANAL although I do work with them on a regular basis
Making a photocopy of a single newspaper article is a copyright violation and is technically stealing - it's just hard to detect and rarely prosecuted.
Building and selling copies of a Ferrari Enzo would be a trademark violation not copyright - don't think cars are subject to copyright law (other than the owners manual and the firmware in the various computers). Building your own copy is a grey area where you probably could be prosecuted under trademark law but most companies would settle for making you take off any badges and logos.
Burning a copy of an install disk is a copyright violation, except to the extent that the license agreement allows it. Most agreements allow you to burn a backup copy but not for installation on more than one computer. A more appropriate comment would be "thank you for helping me steal software my friend, I owe you a beer".
They say a good friend is one who will help you move a dead body. That doesn't make moving a dead body legal either
The important thing to understand here is the distinction between what is legal and what you can often do without being prosecuted, whether the gap comes from lack of law enforcement resources or concerns about bad PR. Getting away with something does not make it legal.
There are ongoing efforts to codify "reasonable" scenarios where using copyrighted material without the author's approval is allowed, with names like "fair use" or "fair dealing" depending on jurisdiction. One could argue that "fair use" doctrine should be extended to allow activities such as posting a copy of a newspaper article on your office door, but I don't believe even that is allowed under fair use today. It seems unlikely that your other examples would ever be allowed.
Making a photocopy of a single newspaper article is a copyright violation and is technically stealing - it's just hard to detect and rarely prosecuted.
Building and selling copies of a Ferrari Enzo would be a trademark violation not copyright - don't think cars are subject to copyright law (other than the owners manual and the firmware in the various computers). Building your own copy is a grey area where you probably could be prosecuted under trademark law but most companies would settle for making you take off any badges and logos.
Burning a copy of an install disk is a copyright violation, except to the extent that the license agreement allows it. Most agreements allow you to burn a backup copy but not for installation on more than one computer. A more appropriate comment would be "thank you for helping me steal software my friend, I owe you a beer".
They say a good friend is one who will help you move a dead body. That doesn't make moving a dead body legal either
The important thing to understand here is the distinction between what is legal and what you can often do without being prosecuted, whether the gap comes from lack of law enforcement resources or concerns about bad PR. Getting away with something does not make it legal.
There are ongoing efforts to codify "reasonable" scenarios where using copyrighted material without the author's approval is allowed, with names like "fair use" or "fair dealing" depending on jurisdiction. One could argue that "fair use" doctrine should be extended to allow activities such as posting a copy of a newspaper article on your office door, but I don't believe even that is allowed under fair use today. It seems unlikely that your other examples would ever be allowed.
Comment