View Single Post
Old 01-10-2019, 07:31 PM   #374
gmw
cacoethes scribendi
gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.gmw ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
gmw's Avatar
 
Posts: 5,818
Karma: 137770742
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Device: Kobo Aura One & H2Ov2, Sony PRS-650
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer View Post
The problem is that while I think of illegal downloading as theft. I don't think it as theft of property, per see. It's just that nothing other than theft comes close to accurately describing "taking something without paying for it" for me. And that's what illegal downloading is: taking something you're not entitled to have without paying for it. If that's not theft, then nothing is, in my opinion.
I agree with you, but I didn't really want to re-open the argument of whether copyright infringement is technically theft or not. My primary point was that I think - maybe - pwalker8 objected to calling copyright property because of the (potential) confusion I discuss in the previous post. This would explain what otherwise - to me - seems like an attempt to say the sky is not blue.

But once pwalker8 understands that defining copyright as property does not affect the argument over whether copyright infringement is theft, then maybe the sky can go back to being blue.
gmw is offline   Reply With Quote