You're again talking about unimplemented morals, which vary person to person, while Im talking about ways to describe actual law. A copywritten work cant be legally shared, displayed, or so on without permission of the owner. The laws have exceptions like fair use, first sale doctrine on individual copies, or libraries loaning them out. Past that, your claims of morals have no practical meaning in a country that enforces the opposite.

Such morals should instead incite those who possess them to act as a democracy to reform the complex and corrupt system. Like we did fighting thjngs like SOPA. So far, almost no action toward elected officials backing up alternatives you suggest people want while they put strong effort onto other issues. I think this means majority of the US just doesnt care that much. And quite a few oppose us hoping to be next to get rich with a monopoly or maintain good portfolios.

You brought up the topic of ethics. I am just explaining why the argument, "sharing is illegal", sounds absurd to many people.

As you noted, copyright laws respect many legally protected activities, like sharing media and holding local displays. The law is pretty clear and I think that is why we don't see many cases about the topic.

" I am just explaining why the argument, "sharing is illegal", sounds absurd to many people."

Oh yeah, I can see that. Might help get the laws changed if more people realize how absurd they are. :)