Which is moraly (not legaly) worse? Secondhand _ Pirating _ Renting_Lending

[scottie]

Spiteful49 said:

scottie said:
"But by going by that logic, you could then say since I can't afford x I can just take x whether x is a necessity or just something I want.

Is that right or does that for some reason only apply to games?"

Lets put that to the test. I'll go back and copy down what I said, inserting the word milk in several places

"Stealing a bottle of milk does not in any way, shape or form detract from the net wealth of anyone." Oh wait, that's not true

"But the only reason you have put forward as to why stealing milk is bad is because then you don't buy milk that you otherwise would have."

Oh wait, there was another reason presented. That you detract from the wealth of someone else

Not comparable at all.

So sneaking into movies, concerts, clubs, sporting events….  Anything that you want to see but cant afford is not wrong and is a neutral act?

 

I'm going to say yes, with a few 'unless' es

 

If any of these events are near capacity, then it is wrong. You are detracting from the experience of paying customers and other potential customers might decide to go somewhere less busy

If these any of these places have low prices on food/drinks/any actual physical product, which is subsidised by ticket revenue, then buying said item is wrong

If people have to clear up after you, it is wrong. don't litter :P

There's probably some more provisos