Comment by echoangle
18 hours ago
> If unauthorized copying is akin to preventing a potential sale then using a gym for an authorized/non paid amount of time to try the gym without paying is not stealing.
Well using a gym for free isn’t stealing either. Although the analogy is flawed because a gym has a limited capacity so you could take up the space of legitimate customers, which you don’t do when torrenting copyrighted stuff.
> Creator of the thing sets the terms. People have the ability to not buy it if they do not like the terms. But they do not have the right to alter the terms via stealing.
No, creators can’t just redefine words. It’s not stealing, because you’re not taking something away from someone.
Using a gym for free is a theft of services. All states have a law like this. For example, Florida Statutes § 812.014.
Pirating is theft.
I wouldn't really call theft of services "stealing", but I'm not a native speaker. Maybe that's something people say.
> Pirating is theft.
Do you mean copyright violations or ship piracy?
I don't see how this follows, because torrenting a movie doesn't take a service from the movie right holder. They wouldn't even notice if they wouldn't actively monitor torrent users. Theft of service is a crime because it causes unpaid work for the service provider, right? That's why I said the gym analogy doesn't apply here.
Theft of services isn't just about causing unpaid work; it involves intentionally depriving a provider of the rightful compensation for their services.
Both cases are equal in principle.
Theft of IP falls under a different law in the US than theft of something like gym services.
6 replies →
I think the idea (which is why i asked the original question) is "theft" of opportunity for income.