I completely understand the need for copyright laws. We as artists have to have our intellectual property protected. Here in the United States we have such laws to dissuade acts of art piracy. We have the law to help us recoup any damages or profits that our stolen art rendered for these thieves. That's what these laws are designed to do.
Like everything, copyright law can be used and they can be abused. There is a huge difference between someone taking an artist's work and using in an advertising campaign and someone who likes the piece and displays it on a website because it speaks to them or because they just love it. There is a need for artists to use restraint in threatening lawsuits and reporting websites. A distinction should be made between art lovers and art thieves.
We as artists sometimes use these laws in a way they were never intended to be used. Just because we can does not mean that we should.
I think we do ourselves a great disservice by acting like the corporate world by threatening lawsuits and throwing people off their property, or little art appreciation sites they've put up. I studied the copyright laws a little when I was at R.I.T. in the mid 1990's. Then there was no YouTube. No MySpace. No Flicker. Therefore there was no thought of a person displaying art they admire in a gallery that everyone can access like those online. Had there been, I think exceptions would have been made or something worked out so everyone can enjoy, and display, the art they see that moves them.
The music industry has worked out many different music sharing techniques, both audio and visual. We should do the same. But it will never happen if we take a hardcore approach to our craft and put up barbed wire fences, moats and no trespassing signs. We should leave the little people alone and not keep looking for even the smallest of slights to take up arms against.