> Technically, copying furniture is not ok, it's infringing on the copyright of the design.
The idea that a design would be something you'd own, license, or keep track of, is a very new one.
> freely copying people's works because it isn't available in your region is probably harming the creator of the work since their potential market is taken away from them.
Sure, but by how much? Does it actually lead to works not being made, to creators going back to their day job? Is the cost actually bigger than the benefit of copying the work?
Also, as a policy this aligns the incentives correctly: it means creators and publishers are encouraged to find a way to distribute their work everywhere as soon as possible. Which is what copyright is supposed to do.
The idea that a design would be something you'd own, license, or keep track of, is a very new one.
> freely copying people's works because it isn't available in your region is probably harming the creator of the work since their potential market is taken away from them.
Sure, but by how much? Does it actually lead to works not being made, to creators going back to their day job? Is the cost actually bigger than the benefit of copying the work?
Also, as a policy this aligns the incentives correctly: it means creators and publishers are encouraged to find a way to distribute their work everywhere as soon as possible. Which is what copyright is supposed to do.