Comment by notepad0x90

Copyright laws exist to prevent those who are not wealthy from sharing their resources with each other. That's why AI companies and now FB can get away with it, the law wasn't meant for them.

Fundamentally, the ability to share what you own is a right no government has legitimate authority to restrict. Such laws are illegitimate. Governments don't own people, they govern them. Governance is scoped within limits of authority. Even slaves and prisoners can share their food,clothing and other resources with each other, preventing them is not just inhumane but beyond the authority of slave owners and prison wardens. It boils down to this: if you own something, you can give it away for free because ownership implies authority to retain and give away the property. The right to own things can be restricted, but once ownership is allowed, no one has the authority to restrict retention or free exchange of owned resources. Governments can regulate commerce, but free exchange of resources is beyond their authority since it isn't commercial activity. Keep in mind that this is a more crucial and important concept beyond basic liberty and human rights. If you can't own stuff, nothing else matters regarding your relationship with the government. Telling you that you own stuff but then stripping away the meaning of ownership so that you don't really own stuff is a sneaky way of governments exceeding the limits of their authority.

Another sneaky and fraudulent thing is implied acceptance of licensing. Stamping a copyright notice,eula, ToS,etc.. means nothing. if You buy a book with cash, your exchange is with the person who sold it to you and You now own the book. It isn't licensed to you, it is yours to give away for free. The same concept applies to software, video, music,etc.. neither intermediaries, nor original content authors have the authority to enforce a licensing agreement or copyright over the content, unless a license agreement is required at point of sale, and even then the agreement is beyond the two participants. If you agree to a copyright license contract and purchase music, and then you give it away for free, it makes sense to get sued by the copy right owner over violation of that contract. But the person you sold it to has no obligation to honor a contract they did not enter. The government has no right to implicitly force people to enter a license agreement when they receive goods free of charge by someone. only the person who originally agreed to the contract should be held liable.