While I don't particularly see harm coming to a multibillion dollar corporation if someone torrents a 20 year old movie, piracy is still theft in the sense that something with value was had for zero dollars. The "copying vs taking" argument is irrelevant. Whether or not you're being charged for direct ownership of a tangible item, or being charged for a 1 time viewing of an item, circumventing that agreement is still theft.

[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

So if I enjoy a sunset it's theft because nobody got paid?

[–] spirinolas@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If I enter a theater through the backdoor without paying, is that theft?

[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No, it's trespassing and you could be arrested for it not stealing.

[–] spirinolas@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Ok, so what's difference?

[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

They're literally different legal concepts just like speeding isn't murder.

[–] ssladam@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

I don't disagree, but I definitely do not agree fully with your sentiment. "theft" implies a loss to the owner. (and sorry to folks in the other side, "piracy" also implies theft/loss)

So if folks can sit on top of a skyscraper and look into a ball park to watch the game, it's not theft, but they are enjoying something of value without paying for it, and society generally accepts this behavior in that case. But not if you splice your neighbor's cable to watch for free. (is that even still possible?)

Maybe call it, "involuntary gratis"? It implies some harm, but not on the same degree as theft.