From content users' perspective, it sounds pretty great: we get whatever we want for free, right? But from a content creator's perspective, it's even harder to be creative as a full-time job than it already is. Ultimately, the creators have to get "real jobs" to pay the rent, and the result in the long term is less choice for the users.
Without laws protecting intellectual property, people would still create art and devise inventions, but they might be reticent to share it with others, fearing that their imagination and hard work could be taken advantage of. Ultimately there would be less choice in the marketplace for consumers.
The company would be subject to fines (up to $250,000 in the US).
The legislation of whatever jurisdiction you happen to be in.
Copyright is a federal law which would be valid in California.
Everything written or recorded since 1923 is affected by copyright laws.
If copyright law did not apply to the internet, it would be nearly impossible to monetize anything on it.
no it would violate copyright laws
You would be violating copyright laws.
You don't. That would violate copyright laws.
That would violate copyright laws.
You would need to lobby Congress to amend the law.
No, that would violate copyright laws.
You would have a legal record of the creation and creation date of your work.
In member countries of the World Trade Organization, copyright protection is automatic; registration is not required.