> the part where "I have something I didn't have a minute ago, and would normally have to pay money to acquire it, but didn't" is pretty clear-cut Say after a

> the part where "I have something I didn't have a minute ago, and would normally have to pay money to acquire it, but didn't" is pretty clear-cut Say after a hurricane or other national disaster there's a company selling water bottles for $1. Then, a charity shows up and starts providing water bottles for free. I decide to get the free water bottle instead of paying for one. Clearly no theft is involved, but your description would include this action. Even if you think copyright infringement is wrong, it's clearly different from stealing physical objects. Calling it "theft" is an attempt to create a false equivalency between copyright infringement and shoplifting, burglary, robbery, etc. and ignores much of underlying ethics behind why we prohibit theft in the first place. It's no wonder why opponents of copyright strongly object to the label of "stealing"; it's using a dirty word to dismiss your opponents objections. "Theft" implies copyright infringement is wrong, so by arguing unlicensed copying is theft you are begging the question instead of making an argument defending the current copyright system on its own merits. It's similar to why proponents of abortion access object to the use of the term "murder" to describe abortion. Or why people who eat meat object to calling killing animals "murder".