The copyright industry has pushed the “making available” narrative for so long, that’s sort of become the dominant talking point. IANAL, but as an internet user, I have opinions*:
a. That seems entirely backwards from what the law intends. “Making a copy” is done by the downloader, which is explicitly what the law is about.
b. The industry only went the other way because it was more convenient from a litigation perspective. It’s far easier to sue one person for seeding to 100 peers than to go after the 100 individuals who downloaded from that seeder. They got a few courts to go along with the more loose interpretation to get precedent for the next and the next suit.
* always be aware of your local copyright laws before listening to some rando online.
The copyright industry has pushed the “making available” narrative for so long, that’s sort of become the dominant talking point. IANAL, but as an internet user, I have opinions*:
a. That seems entirely backwards from what the law intends. “Making a copy” is done by the downloader, which is explicitly what the law is about.
b. The industry only went the other way because it was more convenient from a litigation perspective. It’s far easier to sue one person for seeding to 100 peers than to go after the 100 individuals who downloaded from that seeder. They got a few courts to go along with the more loose interpretation to get precedent for the next and the next suit.
* always be aware of your local copyright laws before listening to some rando online.