By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fordy on 29 March 2011
Edit Thread
Calmador said:
vlad321 said:
Calmador said:

'm not wrong.

Your defining theft on whether what you stole is physical or not. I think that doesn't matter.

"In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent"

The only way you can argue that piracy is theft is if you classify ideas as property and that when I buy a game the game isn't mine, but the person to whose idea it is.

However if you go down the path of classifying ideas as properties, you run into so many problems and pitfalls, that you realize it is just silly to consider ideas the same as physical property. Therfore, you are wrong.

I'm not talking about the legal definition. I'm talking about it morally.

Yes intillectual property can be stolen, it is sold for the ownership of ONE person, not as many copies as you can make. You weren't sold infinite copies of the game. It can be stolen, physcially, a game disc from a retail store or just dowloading a copy from a torrent or a copy from a friend. What's not to understand?

EDIT: Thinking about it.. the physical part of the game is worth very little... the value in the game is the information (digital side) to it. That's what truly is being stolen, physical side of it is simply holding the game.

The difference between morals and legality is that morals are individual interpretations of right or wrong. They'll never stand up in court purely because of situational qualities that are not fully understood by those with such morals. Hence, why the legal system is there.

Now, allow me to totally destroy your stance here. Say that I make a copy of a game for my friend, who had a copy of the game at one stage and his disc was destroyed. By your logic and morals, that's an illegal thing to do. However, legally it is perfectly fine. Why? Because when you buy a game, you do not actually buy it. You cannot own a game, unless you're the publisher. What is compromised in acts of piracy is the end user license purchased to play that game.

The act of physically copying the game is not a crime. There's a reason why it's not called stealing. If you drive a car unlicensed, you're not stealing the roads.

The end user license gives the user the right to circumvent copyright for themselves only. Therefore, if you play the game without a license, it's regarded as copyright theft, and not stealing. It's the same background as agreements with patent holders in order to use their property. Does this mean that Sony "stole" the Dualshock technology when it violated Immersion's patent?