You can make a copy of content (for yourself) AFTER you have purchased it. If we can all make a single copy without purchasing it then the writer literally makes nothing... are you even thinking about what you are writing? You are lying about teaching media law.
Also, it is obviously an violation of the law to store a copy of any copyrighted material and share it with anyone else.
Are you really that dumb? Why would anyone need more than a “single copy” or “single piece” of a book or a song and only need to purchase a second copy? Do you just steal a book and then pay for the 2nd copy? And why would “make” or “acquire” mean allowing stealing? No one would even write useful books. And there would be no need for copyright law, or commercial books, art or music. Musicians/artists already complain about getting screwed by Spotify and other music distributors. While there are plenty of lawsuits involving copyright laws, whether regarding books or music.
Why not just go to a library? It’s paid for by your taxes...Interlibrary loan will help you find obscure titles. Authors like Rob Carver save new traders substantial money and time. Something to think about IMHO
I can almost guarantee NO internet provider is doing this. What is possible and what is probable are different things and wannabe smart people love to conflate the 2.
Taught at Lynn University, Florida Atlantic University and the University of Technology, Sydney, in Australia. I wish I could say calling someone a liar was defamation but I would have to show damages. Your interpretation of copyright law is commonsensical, perhaps, but not the way the law is implemented. I assume the person who provides me with a .pdf obtained it legally and is not running a business selling copies. If I know otherwise I MAY be guilty of copyright infringement. I think this is my final statement on this obviously touchy subject. Go ask a lawyer, if you have questions or want to debate. Frankly, I'm too busy.