5 ms·
If anyone remembers the long discussions at the start of 2000s in relation to music/video pirating, this is not "stealing", it's "intellectual property somethin
by 21 8y ago
If anyone remembers the long discussions at the start of 2000s in relation to music/video pirating, this is not "stealing", it's "intellectual property something something".
The content companies had giant advertising campaigns trying to brand this as "theft" or "stealing". Of course, when they sued someone they used the proper term: "IP violation"
I'm not arguing if it's acceptable or not, but it's not the same as theft which leaves the owner without the item.
- dogma1138 8y agoIt’s on the same level as IP theft of any kind since you cause some loss of revenue and investment, now what portion of piracy results in a financial loss is a different story but it’s not 0. Look at it this way if I steal your trade secrets and clone your product after you spent R&D money on it I’ve essentially “stolen” both a part of your revenue and your investment. Music, film and games cost money to develop and produce pirating them does incur a financial penalty and that does fall under the common definition of theft. However as far as Apple goes if you buy a copy of their OS you can easily consider that acceptable since EULA restrictions on the usage can be ethically counter argued.
- kimdotcom 8y agoInfringement != theft
- dogma1138 8y agoIP infringement and theft are different things, infringement is often done in regards to IP that is in the open, if I hack and steal your trade secrets which are by definition secrets and not protected by a patent what is that then? And in any case you are arguing about semantics, "theft" is also technically not a singular legal definition but an amalgamation of different civil and criminal legal statues. In most jurisdictions intangible property also does fall under the broader definition of theft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft
- isostatic 8y agoTheft in the UK (England and Wales) is covered by the theft act 1978 (and previous) A key term is intent to deprive, hence most people nicking a car will be done for taking without consent - no need to prove an intent to permanently deprive. Copyright infringement is a whole separate law and is clearly not theft as there's no intent to permanently deprive.
- cma 8y ago> since you cause some loss of revenue and investment Wouldn't leaving a bad review of a bad product be considered theft under this definition?
- sli 8y agoYeah, I feel like that definition of theft would lead to some really awful legal precedents. If a family member has decided to buy some product, and I talk them out of it, I would be committing theft by that definition. At least in the US, that would run afoul of the First Amendment. The company can yell at me all they want or ban me from their services, but they could not legally get the police to arrest me for a bad review or for convincing a family member. Of course, just like with piracy, it would not provable that the revenue was guaranteed in the first place. But companies would absolutely try and litigate over it anyway. I suppose this discussion is unrelated to this thread, though.
- ryandrake 8y agoNow walking somewhere is theft from the taxi company. Incredible how successful these media companies have been at redefining the word. You can’t steal something from somebody if they still have it after the “theft” (the IP) or if they never had it in the first place (the revenue).
- facing_worlds 8y agoIts not loss of revenue per se since apple doesnt sell licenses for the OS. And presumably you are making the hackintosh because you DONT want the exact hardware apple sells.
- mixmastamyk 8y agoIf only during the recent bike thefts in our apartment building, the thieves would have run away with perfect copies instead of originals. :-(