| Many people used to download bootleg movies in the | | | | So if file sharing is legal, so too might free movie |
| days when free movie downloads were legal: or is it | | | | downloads be legal or even downloading bootleg |
| still legal? Nobody really knows. What we do know is | | | | movies. Not so! Bootleg movies, by their very name, |
| that it is not illegal to use P2P file sharing software, but | | | | are movies that have been illegally downloaded |
| that it is illegal to use it illegally. Confusing? You bet! | | | | because these movies come within copyright law: 70 |
| However, if you keep one single fact in mind then it | | | | years have not passed since the death of the |
| should all be become clear - well, clearer! It is not legal | | | | originator. |
| to download copyright material, whether that is movies, | | | | Of course it doesn't help that each country has a |
| music, games books, articles - anything. That makes | | | | different definition of copyright and what the period of |
| sense otherwise copyright laws would be meaningless. | | | | time is before a movie or music track is not longer |
| What is confusing many people is the focus on two | | | | protected by copyright. This is becoming such a large |
| specific forms of download (bootleg movies and | | | | problem that there should some unanimity between |
| music) and on claiming that file sharing is illegal - which it | | | | countries to avoid confusion. |
| patently is not. | | | | Nor does it help for P2P file sharing software to be |
| Let's look at each of these in turn. | | | | declared illegal simply because of the way it is used. |
| Bootleg movies are free movie downloads of movies | | | | Should photocopiers be declared illegal because they |
| that are still protected by copyright. If you are not sure | | | | can be used to copy protected books? By this |
| whether a particular movie is protected then if it is a | | | | definition all copying processes should be illegal. |
| modern blockbuster it is copyrighted. The copyright | | | | It is not the process that is illegal, but the act, and since |
| period used to last for 50 years after the death of the | | | | file sharing is a process and not an act, it is those using |
| originator, but this has been extended to 70 years, so if | | | | the process illegally that should be prosecuted rather |
| a movie or music track was made after 1940 it will be | | | | than the process banned. Otherwise where do 'they' |
| protected and you cannot legally download it unless | | | | stop? Why should we allow ourselves to be rules by |
| you pay for it. | | | | movie moguls and music barons? |
| For work originating before 1940, whether or not it is | | | | They brought it upon themselves by a) becoming |
| protected for copying by copyright laws will depend on | | | | greedy and extending the copyright period from 50 |
| the date of death of the originator. So, if that was in | | | | years to 70, b) targeting kids and their moms rather |
| 1936, the product will have been legally downloadable | | | | than the massive Asian producers of copied movies |
| using peer-to-peer file sharing software since 2006. If | | | | and music and c) focusing on the means of copying |
| the originator died in 1970, then the work will be | | | | rather than the act of doing so. |
| protected until 2040. | | | | It is legal to use P2P file sharing software to get free |
| So the statements being made that file sharing is illegal | | | | movie downloads so long as these movies are no |
| are totally erroneous: it is not. It is what P2P software | | | | longer protected by copyright law. It is legal to |
| is used to copy and download that is illegal. The | | | | download free music under the same terms. Until the |
| problem in making such sweeping statements is that | | | | law changes, nobody can claim file sharing to be illegal |
| once people have established that one statement is | | | | - it is copying bootleg movies that is illegal. |
| wrong they will naturally begin to question the next. | | | | |