What is the logic behind saying Piracy is stealing?

[PrivateSmiley]

ima turn to my good friend wikipedia here

The terms piracy and theft are often associated with copyright infringement.[4][5] The original meaning of piracy is "robbery or illegal violence at sea",[6] but the term has been in use for centuries as a synonym for acts of copyright infringement.[7][8] Theft, meanwhile, emphasizes the potential commercial harm of infringement to copyright holders. However, copyright is a type of intellectual property, an area of law distinct from that which covers robbery or theft, offenses related only to tangible property. Not all copyright infringement results in commercial loss, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1985 that infringement does not easily equate with theft.[1]
This was taken further in the case MPAA v. Hotfile, where Judge Kathleen M. Williams granted a motion to deny the MPAA the usage of words whose appearance was primarily "pejorative". This list included the word "piracy", the use of which, the motion by the defense stated, serves no court purpose but to misguide and inflame the jury.[9][10]
"Piracy"


The term "piracy" has been used to refer to the unauthorized copying, distribution and selling of works in copyright.[8] The practice of labelling the infringement of exclusive rights in creative works as "piracy" predates statutory copyright law. Prior to the Statute of Anne in 1710, the Stationers' Company of London in 1557, received a Royal Charter giving the company a monopoly on publication and tasking it with enforcing the charter. Those who violated the charter were labelled pirates as early as 1603.[7] Article 12 of the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works uses the term "piracy" in relation to copyright infringement, stating "Pirated works may be seized on importation into those countries of the Union where the original work enjoys legal protection."[8] Article 61 of the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) requires criminal procedures and penalties in cases of "willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale."[11] Piracy traditionally refers to acts of copyright infringement intentionally committed for financial gain, though more recently, copyright holders have described online copyright infringement, particularly in relation to peer-to-peer file sharing networks, as "piracy".[8]
Richard Stallman and the GNU Project have criticized the use of the word "piracy" in these situations, saying that publishers use the word to refer to "copying they don't approve of" and that "they [publishers] imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on them."[12]
"Theft"
Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as theft. In copyright law, infringement does not refer to theft of physical objects that take away the owner's possession, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.[13] Courts have distinguished between copyright infringement and theft. For instance, the United States Supreme Court held in Dowling v. United States (1985) that bootleg phonorecords did not constitute stolen property. Instead,
"interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright: '[...] an infringer of the copyright.'"
The court said that in the case of copyright infringement, the province guaranteed to the copyright holder by copyright law – certain exclusive rights – is invaded, but no control, physical or otherwise, is taken over the copyright, nor is the copyright holder wholly deprived of using the copyrighted work or exercising the exclusive rights held.[1]

[Super Kami Dende]

The creator loses profit.

[Deleted]

How about this then....

3 a : the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright
b : the illicit accessing of broadcast signals

I have no problem with that definition. Unauthorized use, sure. But i'll never concede to being guilty of "stealing someones broadcast signal" or whatever.

- - - Updated - - -

Intellectual property theft, yes.

No. Unauthorized use of intellectual property. Not theft.

[Lochton]

I have no problem with that definition. Unauthorized use, sure. But i'll never concede to being guilty of "stealing someones broadcast signal" or whatever.

Well, the last one was back in the days where you would hook up to other's antenna or satellite dish. Guess more now a days is when people try to sneak in on your Wi-fi.

[Cheze]

And by taking intellectual property you've not paid for and redistributing it, you're committing theft.

Copying someones designs is still a form of theft, which would be what you copying my chair would be. Designs are still owned by people and copying them detail for detail is unlawful. Which is whhy those who do it, tend to change little things about the designs so they can get away with it. If you keep it for yourself, you'll get away with it. If you start selling your copies, you might not. Unless you're China.

it's unlawful because we have intellectual property laws; that does not make it theft

if you bother to actually read any of the relevant laws you will see that infringement is not defined as theft

[Themius]

We're (meaning a bunch of internet posters, from multiple different countries, from professions/ backgrounds that very likely aren't legal in scope) not going to change the law by talking about it on an internet fan site for World of Warcraft in a philosophical fashion and examine it and how it actually applies to piracy and what impact piracy actually has on companies.

The law (where applicable) says what it says right now, agreement of whether it's right, wrong or logical is not mandatory. Abiding by it is.

If you want it changed, take it up with the right people that can actually do something about it, in the right place. A forum on MMO-Champion is not that place.

I'm not trying to be reductive. I, personally, just see no point in the discussion when nothing we say or argue here is going to change what the law (again....where applicable) says.

If this is your outlook why discuss any topic?

- - - Updated - - -

Few people doing it is not going to do a lot of damage (if any), but lets say everyone starts doing it then the whole thing falls apart. Its exactly like that thread where the guy said that being good does not pay off, one guy being an asshole is not going to do much, but everyone being an asshole is going to make society a shithole.

the thing is though a lot of people get exposure to games they end up buying via pirating... if you take away pirating many wouldn't end up buying games.

Myself I don't play that many games and I get aquatinted with them through pirating and decide if I want to buy or not. The only games I consistently play are the ones I own by the way

[Laqweeta]

Piracy is essential to my game buying needs. I don't buy many games before I pirate them first. Piracy has led me to spend thousands of dollars I would have otherwise spent on Burgers or BBQ. I don't give a shit about anyone opinion on the matter to be honest.

100% this.

I'm not just going to throw $60 on a game and find out I don't like it. Add demos/trials to your games or suffer.

[Jotaux]

Blizzard isn't using that, though. And they aren't ''stealing'', they are copying it. Blizzard still has that data if they ever want to bring it back, as with Vanilla.
.

If Blizzard doesn't protect it then they could lose that IP allowing anyone to use it (Like Valve) even if Blizzard decided to bring in legacy servers. It would basically be a complete loss of revenue. I mean I have no issues with private servers, I played on a BC one for a couple of weeks but I understand why Blizzard would move to protect their IP.

[Deleted]

it's unlawful because we have intellectual property laws; that does not make it theft

if you bother to actually read any of the relevant laws you will see that infringement is not defined as theft

Could you provide them for me? I wouldn't know where to begin looking. And if you already know, I figured you'd find the right ones faster than me.

- - - Updated - - -

100% this.

I'm not just going to throw $60 on a game and find out I don't like it. Add demos/trials to your games or suffer.

Steam's refund policy is pretty solid if you're buying there. Waiting for critiques is also something worth doing. Watching videos of the game too.

[Deleted]

Take this hypothetical future scenario:

3d printers get so advanced in the future that they can replicate most simpler consumer products with great accuracy. People start downloading design schematics and start replicating Nike shoes, and other brand name products. This will grow from an underground geek and enthusiast movement to a fairly main stream practice.

The big corporations will complain how their copyrights and designs are being infringed upon, but most people still buy the original products from the internet or stores.
As 3d printing gets more popular some enterprising fellow will start the Spotify or Steam of 3d-printing schematics where people can buy original brand designs to print themselves and the corporations get a royalty. Consumers can download new colors and pattern designs to update their sneakers so they get additional value and incentive to pay for the design. Yet people still buy shoes and they still make billions.

Adidas being who they are decide they want ALL of the profit so they open up their own much inferior version of a 3d printing market place that charge a hefty premium compared to the other sites so they don't make a lot of money. Adidas being who they are blame piracy for their lack of revenue and stick their legal dogs and lobbying groups on Washington to try and stop these new markets because they don't want to adapt or take responsibility for their failing marketing and sales strategy.

And round and round we go every time there is a new innovation.


And to tie it to this discussion in the scenario above, the person 3d printing Nike sneakers isn't stealing the sneakers from Nike, he is copying their designs.

[Deleted]

If someone uploaded that copy to the internet and i downloaded it i wouldn't consider it theft. If i broke in to his office with the intent of copying those plans i would say it is depending on Intent, motive and so on. If i just saw them lying around and i made a xerox of them for giggles i wouldn't consider it as i had stolen something from him.

Have you ever heard the word copyright? Obviously not....So if you seeing a car or anything alone in the middle of nowhere you can "borrow it" because you won`t consider stealing...if something lying around does not means you have the right to do with it whatever you want....ownership....You just simply can`t understand the concept of intellectual product...Simple minded people can`t understand something which does not exists in 3D ..Like downloading a movie..."hey, it was on the internet and it`s just a copy" but to make that movie hundreds and hundreds people worked together, spent countless time, money and resources...hoping to make a profitable investment....Of course the ending product is something which is not exists (or not necessarily) in 3D..Same with music bands and singers...a song does not exists in 3D, music either..but it`s coming from somewhere isn`t? Requires time and resources to make it exists

Final words: I`m fucking hypocritical in a way...I`m downloading stuff from the internet..movies, software...but I don`t try to whitewash myself...intellectual products are a service of entertainment or education or economy but still PRODUCTS

[Rahulk]

So I don't really care about your opinion on whether piracy is evil or whatever, I am simply asking what people have in their heads when they say Piracy is Stealing.

The problem i see is the misuse of the term piracy. If you use torrent to avoid paying for intellectual property you are committing another crime not piracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy

[Deleted]

The EU funded research to look into this and found out that piracy isn't actually causing any loss. Instead, it might even benefit the creators/distributers, as some people feel guilty. want to own the Bluray after liking it or want to be supportive. However, the EU suppressed this 300 page study until someone from the German pirate party demanded the public release.

https://gizmodo.com/the-eu-suppresse...-do-1818629537

TL;DR
Study says piracy is not stealing

[Deleted]

Have you ever heard the word copyright? Obviously not....So if you seeing a car or anything alone in the middle of nowhere you can "borrow it" because you won`t consider stealing...if something lying around does not means you have the right to do with it whatever you want....ownership....You just simply can`t understand the concept of intellectual product...Simple minded people can`t understand something which does not exists in 3D ..Like downloading a movie..."hey, it was on the internet and it`s just a copy" but to make that movie hundreds and hundreds people worked together, spent countless time, money and resources...hoping to make a profitable investment....Of course the ending product is something which is not exists (or not necessarily) in 3D..Same with music bands and singers...a song does not exists in 3D, music either..but it`s coming from somewhere isn`t? Requires time and resources to make it exists

Final words: I`m fucking hypocritical in a way...I`m downloading stuff from the internet..movies, software...but I don`t try to whitewash myself...intellectual products are a service of entertainment or education or economy but still PRODUCTS

I understand perfectly, you however don't. Just check my post history in this thread so i don't have to repeat myself so many times. Take the post i made above this one. If hypothetically i could 3d print Nike sneakers would you say i stole those sneakers from Nike? Adapt or go under.

[Deleted]

it's unlawful because we have intellectual property laws; that does not make it theft

if you bother to actually read any of the relevant laws you will see that infringement is not defined as theft

Industrial espionage have a few words with you..."Economic or industrial espionage takes place in two main forms. In short, the purpose of espionage is to gather knowledge about (an) organization(s). It may include the acquisition of intellectual property, such as information on industrial manufacture, ideas, techniques and processes, recipes and formulas."
In short: Stealing from the competition aka theft

[Mittens]

If this is your outlook why discuss any topic?

- - - Updated - - -



the thing is though a lot of people get exposure to games they end up buying via pirating... if you take away pirating many wouldn't end up buying games.

Myself I don't play that many games and I get aquatinted with them through pirating and decide if I want to buy or not. The only games I consistently play are the ones I own by the way

I have trouble believing that something like this can be achieved to the tunes of the millions of dollars needed to cover costs of production.

[Deleted]

I understand perfectly, you however don't. Just check my post history in this thread so i don't have to repeat myself so many times. Take the post i made above this one. If hypothetically i could 3d print Nike sneakers would you say i stole those sneakers from Nike? Adapt or go under.

Sorry but who the hell gives a flying fuck about a hypothetical case..why 3D printers?...jump straight to Star Trek grade replicator....and btw you obviously don`t understand the copyright word
"Fundamentally, copyright is a law that gives you ownership over the things you create. Be it a painting, a photograph, a poem or a novel, if you created it, you own it and it’s the copyright law itself that assures that ownership. The ownership that copyright law grants comes with several rights that you, as the owner, have exclusively. Those rights include:

The right to reproduce the work
to prepare derivative works
to distribute copies
to perform the work
and to display the work publicly
These are your rights and your rights alone. Unless you willingly give them up (EX: A Creative Commons License), no one can violate them legally. This means that, unless you say otherwise, no one can perform a piece written by you or make copies of it, even with attribution, unless you give the OK.

Inversely, if you’re looking for material to use or reuse, you should not do any of these things without either asking permission or confirming that the work is in the public domain, which means that the copyright has expired and all of the above rights have been forfeited. Simply put, if the work isn’t in the public domain and you don’t have permission to use a piece, you put yourself in risk of legal action, regardless of your intentions.

Because, beyond fair use and parody (issues for later essays), the holder of a copyrighted piece has near carte blanche to do what they want with their work. It’s no different than owning a car, a house or a pen. One can lend it out to a friend, sell it, modify it or even destroy it. In short, if you own the copyright to something, you have the same rights that you do with anything else and, in some instances, even more. After all, you did create it. It only makes sense that you would own the fruits of your labor. That’s what copyright law is all about."

And yes you gonna steal those sneakers..the concept of them and how do they look...the paintings, the Nike sign, etc...once more..you just a simpleton who can`t understand anything which is not 3D....

[Deleted]

I have trouble believing that something like this can be achieved to the tunes of the millions of dollars needed to cover costs of production.

A good example of this is the movie The man from earth. This indy film went largely unnoticed by the world and barely made any money at all. That is until someone uploaded it on to pirate bay and word of mouth got around. The movie got so much traction that the production company released a dvd and blueray of the movie which sold extremely well and more than recouped production costs. A few years later there have been many different editions with a new special edition blueray getting released this year.

Hard to say how common a phenomena like this is as most production companies wouldn't admit to it.

[Nyoken]

Yea I can never understand this idiotic way of thinking either....makes zero sense for me and always will.... THE BILLION DOLLAR COMPANIES.....AREN'T GETTING ENOUGH MONEY....SO WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM MORE. Like what the fuck?!?! I'm not a millionaire, so if I can get shit for free, I will.

[Deleted]

Sorry but who the hell gives a flying fuck about a hypothetical case..why 3D printers?...jump straight to Star Trek grade replicator....and btw you obviously don`t understand the copyright word
"Fundamentally, copyright is a law that gives you ownership over the things you create. Be it a painting, a photograph, a poem or a novel, if you created it, you own it and it’s the copyright law itself that assures that ownership. The ownership that copyright law grants comes with several rights that you, as the owner, have exclusively. Those rights include:

The right to reproduce the work
to prepare derivative works
to distribute copies
to perform the work
and to display the work publicly
These are your rights and your rights alone. Unless you willingly give them up (EX: A Creative Commons License), no one can violate them legally. This means that, unless you say otherwise, no one can perform a piece written by you or make copies of it, even with attribution, unless you give the OK.

Inversely, if you’re looking for material to use or reuse, you should not do any of these things without either asking permission or confirming that the work is in the public domain, which means that the copyright has expired and all of the above rights have been forfeited. Simply put, if the work isn’t in the public domain and you don’t have permission to use a piece, you put yourself in risk of legal action, regardless of your intentions.

Because, beyond fair use and parody (issues for later essays), the holder of a copyrighted piece has near carte blanche to do what they want with their work. It’s no different than owning a car, a house or a pen. One can lend it out to a friend, sell it, modify it or even destroy it. In short, if you own the copyright to something, you have the same rights that you do with anything else and, in some instances, even more. After all, you did create it. It only makes sense that you would own the fruits of your labor. That’s what copyright law is all about."

And yes you gonna steal those sneakers..the concept of them and how do they look...the paintings, the Nike sign, etc...once more..you just a simpleton who can`t understand anything which is not 3D....

YOU are the simpleton with an obvious axe to grind. Perhaps you are a failed app developer who's crappy c# game failed to generate any revenue?

It is NOT theft by any definition. It's unauthorized use or copyright infringement at worst.

So i create Nike shoes out of my own materials at no loss to Nike and you are saying i "stole them" This is why nobody can take you guys seriously.

For the record your stolen car analogy is preposterous and clearly not the same issue. Don't argue with the big boys if your are going to be that stupid.