"I burned the original disc" would never mean "I made a copy of the original disc to another CD-R" to anyone that actually knows what burning a disc is.
It would either mean "The original disc is a CD-R that I burned an image to", or "I threw the original disc in a fire".
No, because in that context it makes sense to assume he means burning to a blank CD.
If he showed me the official CD and said "My friend burned this", intending to mean "My friend made a copy of this to their own blank CD", I'd look at them and think "That's clearly not a burnt CD-R, that looks like a legit release".
If you have a painting, and you show it to someone and ask "Could you paint this?", they would assume you're asking if they'd be able to sit down at a blank canvas and paint the same picture.
If you have a painting and say "I painted this", they're going to assume you're talking about the painting in your hands, not a reproduction you made that's hanging up in your garage.
But duuuude when you say "burn to" you are using the terminology you say is incorrect. You would have to say "from this cd im burning a copy" and yet you yourself are using the verbiage "burning to" which directly implies the original cd is being burned [to a copy].
The whole point is that people used burning as a short way of saying what you are saying is correct. People made burn into a verb as a replacement for copy. Its the same thing as saying im burning this data... because you are indeed burning the data onto a copy. People can say "im burning this disc" to mean the same thing this is fucking stuuuuuupid
Edit: its like "im tattooing a tribal pattern onto this guys ass" is the same as "im tattooing a tribal pattern"
Does that mean someone is tattooing something onto a tribal pattern? No!!! Go away please
lol if you want to go through life using words incorrectly and sounding like you don't know what you're talking about to people that do, be my guest. this is a comment thread about a word choice in an article that was clearly confusing for that very reason