Why is it still not clear to mere mortals?

I have long wanted to put up for discussion a few questions regarding this most notorious copyright. Perhaps some of them seem naive, obvious, too simple, or even just silly for those who are well-grounded in this matter. But for ordinary users, most of these questions remain unanswered. Obviously, comments will be more useful for them than the post itself (and the more there are, the better). So let's go.

The first question is: Do I violate the legislation of the Russian Federation if I place on the network (on any network media, the benefit of them is enough) a file that I legally acquired (mp3, exe, dvd, etc.)? In fact, after that, my file is on hardware that does not belong to me, and I cannot manage it. And I do not know who has access to this file either. And if I, in fact, cannot control access to my file on the network, do I have the right to upload it there? And if I do it without malicious intent , for example, to create a backup copy of my music collection?

The second question: Do I violate the legislation of the Russian Federation if I found a file on the network (again, mp3, exe, dvd, etc.) and put a link to it in my diary. I do not copy anything anywhere, do not download anything from anywhere, do not break anything. Yes, and I have, by and large, no idea what kind of file it is (I did not archive it myself, and God knows what is in the archive).
')
The third question: Downloading a file protected by copyright from the network, I violate the legislation of the Russian Federation even if the material is intended for familiarization (or supposedly for information , the devil will take it apart). And if so, at what exact moment when I download it, when I unpack it or when I reproduce it?

The fourth question: How do you know if a file is protected by copyright? Yes, most authors sell their rights to media giant, who have everything under their control. These corporations are losing a lot of money because of piracy and therefore they are struggling with it (read “ loss of money ”) in all possible and impossible ways. But there are authors who do not like this situation either. Do they have the right to allow the free distribution of their works of art on the net (like the same Radiohead or Aquarium)?

The fifth and final question: Why is this topic so rarely raised in the media? Is it because everyone already understands the need for fundamental change? Record companies pay artists not so much as many people think, taking away the lion’s share of sales of licensed copies of music and films. The young musicians do not pay anything at all, but they prohibit the free distribution of their records under any pretext.

My conclusion is sad. Earlier, when I went to the store and bought Pink Floyd's license CD “The Wall” for $ 60 (a scholarship for 3 months, by the way), I thought that the one who wrote these songs would receive the money (yes, I lie I thought nothing then ;-), but I would like to) . And now I have no idea who I am crying for and for what, and I don’t like it. Maybe it’s not the pirates who are to blame, but the whole media empire that demands too much of a pie for itself?

PS: Once again, if someone answers these questions seem obvious, then I, like many others - no. Not everyone at their leisure time in the evening reread the copyright law of the Russian Federation. I would like to go down to earth and explain to an ordinary user what they can and cannot do (and the average user , as a rule, never reads the copyright law of the Russian Federation :-)).