Where does the line get drawn?
Here is a not so hypothetical situation to consider:
Say dude has some vhs, or even beta tapes with some old shit that is not even in production anymore. So dude decides he knows some buddies who would like this stuff so he takes the time and expense to copy that stuff onto digital media and share it. This generates some interest as more people see it and say...'hey man I remember that shit Id love a copy!' so more copies get made. So along comes big business with a copywrite and says hey man you cant do that with our property and sue the guy. Then realising the demand for old school heman videos and thundercats cartoons or whatever that this 'pirate' has created and fueled they then start to reproduce it themselves and market it and make some coin.
But, had the first dude not revived it amoungst his friends and had it not been uploaded onto the net and shared ( all without anyone making any profit yet) and therefore reviving the culture to some extent( interest in the shows, toys and various merchandise) these big businesses would not have realised new profits .
In efect the 'pirate' who digs out some old shit and dusts it off for his friends, and the people sharing shit that is not even availlable for purchase anymore, while violating copywrite laws, have recreated the market for them. Yet, they can still be held liable for'lost profit' and theft.
This shit happens. People revive forgotten relics of our entertainment culture and potentially face prosecution.
Just something we started to talk about the other day while I was copying the complete library of old thundercats cartoons for a friend.
Food for thought.