No. Keys, passwords, all of that data is private. Not shared. It's not like I'm publishing this data for the whole world to see and then trying to regulate access to it. And if I do publish anything, I will do so with the understanding that once it's out there it's out of my control. Complete opposite of what these copyright people want which is public data that they are still able to control.

In cryptography there should be exactly one copy of a private key in the entire universe. When your keys leak due to a mistake or whatever, you invalidate it and make a new one, you don't sue anyone who might have a copy in order to get them to delete it.

By talking about privacy you clearly present that you are aware of and agree with the concept of the law. Once you're on the street it's also out of control, but we have some enforced rules of behavior on them, so you don't get murdered for your keys. Copyright contract isn't any different than any other law, and numbers and their copy-ability have nothing to do with that, because you also have natural murderability, which someone could freely exercise. It's a contract, not the law of nature, which you must respect. If you think otherwise and still expect relative safety on the street, isn't that just a one-sided view?

The social contract behind copyright used to be we'd pretend the works of creators are artificially scarce so that they could make their money for a few years. Then the work would enter the public domain.

When was the last time you ever saw that happen? Some work you grew up with enter the public domain? These companies have already made untold fortunes, several times over. So why doesn't it happen?

They altered the deal. Unilaterally. The money people paid them? They used it to hire lobbyists to change the law and rob people of their public domain rights. These monopolistic protections were meant to be limited, they had an expiration date. The corporations managed to extend copyright duration to the point it might as well be infinite. There exists a public domain but no work ever actually ascends to this mythical place. Fair use? Nobody without an army of lawyers would ever dare try for fear of being sued.

Is this the social contract you want people to respect? The one where they get everything and we get nothing? You say my view is one-sided? These corporations are the most one-sided monopolists there are.

The second people stop pretending artificial scarcity is real, it will be the end of them. Look at how Sci-Hub is shaking up the academic journals. Their end literally can't come soon enough.

I agree with all of these questions and points, this is a huge problem and not "just numbers" argumentation anymore. Also, you're speaking only of a "hot" part of this market, corporations and patent trolls. Copyright is otherwise fine, especially if you want to sell your software yourself, even if it doesn't claim any patents. Why wouldn't I respect e.g. blizzard who gifted me with starcraft, or rake in grass for jets-n-guns, or some saas whose guys worked hard but leaked their "numbers" to the internet somehow. You can't just throw them out with the bathwater.

The Great Gatsby just entered the public domain last year. The whole system stopped for many years, nothing was entering the public domain, and then just last year IIRC it started up again.

But for the most part you are right.