Definition: Given a real-life anecdote of a complex ethical situation, generate a suitable title that describes the main event/root cause of the situation. Imagine that the given text is a social media post, and you have to write the title of the post, so the users can decide to read the main text or not.
Input: A little bit of a game of telephone… so a friend of mine (let’s call him Friend A) recently wrote and directed a feature film. The film is starting to gain momentum. Yay for him!

A mutual friend (let’s call him Friend B) happens to casually browse torrent sites. Over the weekend, he notices Friend A’s film is popular a site he frequents.  Friend B tells me this while debating whether or not to tell this information to Friend A himself.  I remark that this information is actually kind of flattering, considering it means even more people are watching it… even if they are watching it illegally.  Ultimately no hard conclusion is drawn.

I have ANOTHER conversation with ANOTHER mutual friend (this would be Friend C) and I mention what I’d heard from Friend B.  Friend C then texts Friend A about his movie being pirated on torrent sites. He mentions that he's heard this information from Friend B.  Friend A's response was simply "wow - no way"...  So I'm not quite sure how to read that. But  Friend B is now upset with me for telling this this Friend C in the first place... and because he didn’t relay the information to Friend A himself. 

I guess I didn’t understand how secretive Friend B felt the information was... it seemed pretty trivial to me. Still, Friend B is upset with me because he claims he told me this information in confidence. Am I the asshole?

triggering a game of telephone about a friend's film being illegally downloaded