> Why? I was told that using the product without paying for it was a righteous form of protest against outrageous terms. That has nothing to do with it being a

> Why? I was told that using the product without paying for it was a righteous form of protest against outrageous terms. That has nothing to do with it being a good or bad analogy. > How would that not apply to shoplifting because the price is too high or the return policy too short or whatever? What is "that" in this statement? I'm not saying the word "theft" isn't valid, I'm saying the circumstances are different enough that equating the two is a poor basis to reason from.