[tacticalturtle]

The state isn’t enforcing your rights for free - you still have to hire a lawyer and pay legal expenses yourself.

The state is just providing the infrastructure where you are allowed to make a claim, if you choose to do so.

This is like complaining that businesses get to use roads for free - ignoring that we all pay taxes already and built this infrastructure for enabling exactly that purpose.

[cestith]

Copyright infringement in the United States has both civil and criminal elements at law.

[tacticalturtle]

Touché.

This will arouse the ire of the “copyright infringement isn’t theft” people - but we also have the government enforce shoplifting and larceny from retail businesses.

I believe the legal cost to recoup the loss of either IP revenue or physical property will be born by the victim though.

[kstrauser]

Retail businesses pay property taxes to support that. I fully support copyright enforcement being funded by intellectual property taxes:

* You declare your property’s worth.

* You pay IP taxes on that worth.

* You cannot sure for recovery of more than that worth, total. If you have a song worth $1M, and sue 2 people for $500K, then consider it sold. If someone steals a car from you, you can’t collect its full worth each from multiple thieves.

And if you have a $1B film, you can’t sue for $1B if you’re only paying taxes on $1M.

Why are your and my taxes subsidizing theft from the public domain? Let them pay for it, just like our property taxes pay for roads and schools and fire departments and police.

[tacticalturtle]

> Retail businesses pay property taxes to support that.

But they don’t?

Copyright infringement is a federal crime - your property taxes don’t fund that. The income tax that we all pay, including the IP holders, do the funding.

Additionally retail theft, at least in my jurisdiction of Massachusetts is prosecuted by the state - my income taxes fund that, not property taxes.

[kube-system]

Criminal cases aren't a substitute for civil suits, not for copyright... or for any other type of loss.

People generally do have to pay their own way to bring a civil case to recover for damages in a copyright infringement case... or any kind of case.

The fines/jail time typically ascribed by a criminal case do not go into a victims bank account. A criminal case is between the government prosecutor and the defendant. The copyright holder wouldn't even be a party to the case.

[toast0]

Many states do collect restitution funds from revenues generated by the work of encarcerated people, and those funds do go to victims. I don't know that that applies to copyright infringement, but it is possible to get some recovery from criminal proceedings.

[kube-system]

If a criminal case ever happens, it is a possibility that restitution can be awarded. But generally, if somebody's infringing your copyright and you want to seek damages, you need to bring a civil case yourself. Well over 99% of copyright cases are civil.

[cestith]

Sometimes for physical property the police take it and the owner can get it back from them. That much is sometimes free. My motorcycle got returned, but if I wanted compensation for the substantial damage done to it I would have had to get it from the thief.

Often the property is never found and returned.