Comment on Anon tries to save money
festnt@sh.itjust.works 5 days agostealing is taking the property of another person. i was talking about how piracy isn’t stealing, because you’re not taking the property of anyone.
if friend A makes and shares a song they made with friend B, and friend B copies it and sends it to me without A’s permission, that is not stealing, because neither of us are taking friend A’s property. friend A still owns the song, just like the company still owns the game.
“not owning games” is a completely different subject.
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 5 days ago
While digital piracy does not constitute theft in the strict sense defined under common law—namely, the unauthorized taking and carrying away of tangible personal property with intent to permanently deprive the owner thereof—it nonetheless constitutes a violation of exclusive rights granted to copyright holders under Title 17 of the United States Code.
Specifically, piracy infringes upon the copyright owner’s exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and publicly display or perform their work. The fact that no physical object is removed is immaterial; copyright law protects the expression of ideas, not just their physical embodiments. As such, piracy is more accurately classified as a form of copyright infringement—a civil and, in some cases, criminal offense—not as theft per se, but as an analogous wrong with measurable economic harm.
Moreover, jurisprudence has recognized that infringement can result in lost profits, market harm, and unjust enrichment, all of which are actionable. While piracy may lack the zero-sum quality of theft, it undermines the incentive structure copyright law is designed to uphold—namely, the right of creators to control and profit from their original works.
I don’t know what to tell you. Want to know more? Go read about Dowling v United States from 1985. That should help you understand how its still a kind of theft.
festnt@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
>“While digital piracy does not constitute theft in the strict sense defined under common law” >“That should help you understand how its still a kind of theft.”
it’s not theft, but it is? i know it’s a crime, but not all crimes are theft. unless you want to define all crimes as theft.
is murder a kind of theft, because you’re taking someone’s life? is kidnapping a kind theft, because you’re taking a person?
it’s not theft. it’s a different crime. just like pterosaurs and dinosaurs are different groups of animals.
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 5 days ago
I’m not here to get pedantic with a person who doesn’t capitalize the first letter of their sentences. It’s a crime. It’s theft adjacent. This concludes my TED Talk.
festnt@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
oh noooo i don’t press the shift key how could i do sucy a thing
do you define any crime as “theft adjacent”? it would make sense if you did