Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes, and it should be punished under theft.

Yes, and it should be punished under copyright law.

Yes, but it shouldn't be punished.

Certain cases are crimes.

I feel ambivalent towards piracy being a crime.

No, but it should be punished.

No, it is a natural part of a consumer's routine.

No, not at all.

Other

Don't Care / View Poll

[MrWiggles]

What about downloading Portal, because it is currently free...but you have to install stupid Steam. I don't want steam

You only have the consent from the issuer to get it for free from a select venue. Outside that venue, the consent is rescinded and it becomes theft.

[ChairmanPoo]

The money is not being taking from them true, but not giving them the money is the same as taking it.

If you follow that logic then porsche and ferrari should be suing me any minute for not buying all their expensive sports cars.

That depends; do you have a porsche or ferrari without the issuer consent?

Let's follow this a bit further. Let's say I do, because I bought it second hand, or got it from my quadraplegic friend who cannot drive anymore. Following your logic the issuer has "lost a sale"

[MrWiggles]

The money is not being taking from them true, but not giving them the money is the same as taking it.

If you follow that logic then porsche and ferrari should be suing me any minute for not buying all their expensive sports cars.

That depends; do you have a porsche or ferrari without the issuer consent?

Let's follow this a bit further. Let's say I do, because I bought it second hand.

Well, even though second hand sales do hurt the original issuer they are however no longer in ownership of your copy. Without having speficic examples to work from, I have to state things like in general. IN general, when you purchase something its your to do as you please within reason and legality. You can bequeath your own property or sell it. There are instances where selling it to someone else may void some features (Mfg. Warranties generally dont cover second hand purchasers) or it maybe wrong to sell it. An engagement ring given to the bride, but if she break it off, is not allowed to pawn the ring for cash, as its no longer hers.
EA is trying to stop second hand sales, btw. Second hand sales are until recently loss of sale that Issuer of the product had no control over, much like shrink.
Second hand sales don't violate any copy right laws (In spirit or body) to my knowledge. As long as each second hand sale was bought with consent. Neruz picture about gross copy right voilation can come into play here, about making copies without consent and selling it without consent.

But yes, you are right ChairmanPoo, second hand sales do hurt the original issuer as a loss of sale.

[Pathos]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4&feature=player_embedded

I'll just leave this here.

[MrWiggles]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4&feature=player_embedded

I'll just leave this here.

While I agree that copyright law is outmoded by the digital age and needs to be drastically changed because of it; it cannot however change the definition of theft, one held by googling define:theft, or one held in universal opinion in law.

Utility Theft, Cable Theft, Internet Usage Theft are still theft even though they can be done in a fashion where they do not prevent others from enjoying the service. I am not saying all theft is equal, there are different degree of theft.

That definition mishandling serves little utility and is weak justification and has little use/acceptance outside this debate.

[Sean Mirrsen]

That's just nomenclature. Utility Theft, Cable Theft, and Internet Usage Theft are just names. The actual process involves no stealing. Just like software piracy doesn't involve swashbucklers. It's gaining unauthorized access to something. Since data is limitless, you cannot steal it - you can copy it and destroy the original, but that's two different things, and neither of them is theft.

[MrWiggles]

That's just nomenclature. Utility Theft, Cable Theft, and Internet Usage Theft are just names. The actual process involves no stealing. Just like software piracy doesn't involve swashbucklers. It's gaining unauthorized access to something. Since data is limitless, you cannot steal it - you can copy it and destroy the original, but that's two different things, and neither of them is theft.

Stealing is not deprivation. Stealing is taking items without the issuer consent. Deprivation does come into it, can can decide how bad the theft was, as does amount and means done in the action there of.

larceny: the act of taking something from someone unlawfully; "the thieving is awful at Kennedy International"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft

The act of stealing property
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/theft

The unlawful taking of people's goods without using force nor intimidation or violence on them.
www.vidacaixa.es/eng/glosario/glosario_qz.html

Theft - The willful taking of one person's property by another, wrongfully. To recover indemnity, an intent permanently to deprive the owner of his/her property need not be established for there to be a theft under the policy.
http://www.telumsden.com/Glossary.html (A law firm with a nifty glossary.)

There are versions of theft where deprivation is paramount, however its not the sole contributor to theft.
I can take something from you, without your consent then give it back to you. This however does not wash away the initial act nor what it was. It was still theft, without deprivation.

[quinnr]

But copying someones property isn't stealing someones property.

[Leafsnail]

Although it's not quite the same, since generally your copying someone elses legally bought copy with their permission... which means it's more like a breach of buying contract of behalf of the person who bought and shared it.

[MrWiggles]

But copying someones property isn't stealing someones property.

By the definitions provided, how does it not constitute theft?

[Armok]

Owning information is obsolate, just like owning items will be once we have nanotech, and owning land will be once we have cheap spacetravel.

[MrWiggles]

Although it's not quite the same, since generally your copying someone elses legally bought copy
with their permission... which means it's more like a breach of buying contract of behalf of the person who bought and shared it.

In this case the seeder is guilty of copyright violation, and the leecher is guilty of theft.

The seeder may only second hand bequeath the items he bought himself. This does require an act of deprivation, from the seller to the buyer, in general.

[quinnr]

definr.com/take

     7: take something or somebody with oneself somewhere; "Bring me
        the box from the other room";  "Take these letters to the
        boss"; also metaphorical, as in "This brings me to the
        main point" [syn: bring, convey]
     8: take into one's possession; "We are taking an orphan from
        Romania"; "I'll take three salmon steaks" [ant: give]

You aren't "taking" anything. You are making a copy of it.
Also, in the case of torrents/file sharing, you have their consent.

[Aqizzar]

Owning information is obsolate, just like owning items will be once we have nanotech, and owning land will be once we have cheap spacetravel.

And it's really just that easy.

[MrWiggles]

Owning information is obsolate, just like owning items will be once we have nanotech, and owning land will be once we have cheap spacetravel.

NSA and other intelligence communities will probably beg to differ with you, and place information at paramount height of importance especialy with those who know it. ID theft is real and harmful you own your ID. Celebrities sell small variations of their ID for in return of money. Such as liklness.

That, though a tangetically related needs its own thread.