I think there is a subtle point that is often forgotten. Infringement is not merely a single act of replication. Whether some set of actions constitutes infringement depends almost entirely on what is done with results of the replication activity. I would think that to establish a claim of infringement in a court of law the plaintiff would not only have to show that a replica or derivative of the protected work was produced, but would also have show by a preponderance of the evidence that it was subsequently used in an impermissible way.

If someone dumps a bin/cue of a protected work into the upload lock box on my ftp server, then I burn it to a CD intending to find out what it is, and then use the CD as a coaster for my ceramic coffee mug with the rough bottom until the CD gets all scratched beyond any semblance of servicability and that CD has never been in a drive since the protected work was burned onto it, have I infringed?

If I make an unauthorized copy of a protected work and then never do anything with it again, so much as even look at it, and it ends of in the trash, totally unusable for any purpose by anyone, has there been infringement?

It’s somewhat evocative of the old adage, “If a tree falls in the woods and there is no one around to hear it, does it make a noise?”

–TurboGeek