| Wonktonodi said: Although it's not the same as physicall taking something. Some are very strict with their definition of stealing others are more loose with it. I think of piracy as a form of theft. It might not be as easy to mesure the economic effect as physical theft but by no means is it 0. Just because they don't have less doesn't make you having a copy for nothing cost nothing. Then there is the whole moral issue where will then get to those who have to pay more in places where they make less. Personally I think of that as a form of theft by the companies makeing the sales. We as consumers should respect the copy right but we should also demand resonable prices for the products we recieve. Takeing for nothing is not a good way to make demands. |
Changing a words meaning to fit your personal definition is not how language works. If you are speaking English then the word has a set meaning. Just because you want to label someone for a crime a certain way does not make it correct. Murder is not considered theft even though people will say they stole a life. That argument holds no water.
Just because there is an economic effect does not mean it is theft. Poor reviews for a game can cause the sales to go down. This is not a measurable econmic effect, but it is greater than 0. By your logic people who give bad reviews should be considered thieves. It just doesn't make sense to view the problem from that angle.
I never once claimed that having an illegal copy of the game cost nothing to everyone involved. You should try arguing the point I am making rather than the points you wish I were making. It makes the conversation much better. You can think of it as theft of the sales all you want, but that is wrong. Without concrete evidence that the person would have bought a legal copy rather than a pirated one there can be no assertion of a loss. Different crimes have different names for a reason. Insurance fraud directly costs someone money and is not theft. Copyright infringement is not theft.
