or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by bsenka

Studies show the opposite is true. The more people "pirate", the more content they buy.https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121126/00590921141/dear-riaa-pirates-buy-more-full-stop-deal-with-it.shtmlhttp://mumbrella.com.au/pirates-buy-more-content-than-those-who-play-by-the-rules-claims-choice-study-266802http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Another-Study-Pirates-Are-Industrys-Biggest-Paying-Customers-122852
Again:If a person objects to the price of something, and declares that they will not pay it anymore, the seller doesn't get any money from them anymore either. That situation remains the same if the person does nothing, or if they go ahead and download it. The seller's revenue is identical either way.
Crowley gets it!
You're correct. It most certainly is a crime, it's just not theft.No. People just need to stop misusing the language. There are lots of words that already describe the offences they are talking about.Of course it is, depending on the circumstances, people are just using the wrong word to describe it. Just making a copy of someone's ID isn't theft of any kind. It's a completely different offence. Using that ID to take other people's money or property? Now it's theft.That is...
Again, not stolen, nothing is missing..You must have been looking in the mirror when you wrote that.No. In your example, you put down $1, and took $50 worth of actual DVDs. That means you literally stole at least 9 of those DVDs. Whether there is or is not a digital copy elsewhere has no bearing.Espionage, break and enter, possibly hacking offences, sure. Not theft.By definition, yes it is. Theft requires a loss.Nope.Yes it does.
Not even close.You're still using that word in the wrong context, but either way, that statement is nonsense. Creative people "steal" from each other all of the time. They often get sued for it too.
They DON'T work, and that's precisely my point.That may well be a form of theft (probably conversion), but it's not relevant to the argument -- because those movies will still be actually missing.Now you're getting warmer. Sneaking into a movie theatre is much closer to what I'm talking about. You're still wrong about it being theft though. Absolutely nothing was stolen. That doesn't mean an offence hasn't occurred though, clearly one has. Trespassing perhaps, perhaps...
It does matter. If I don't have it anymore, and have to find a way to replace it, that means it was stolen. If it's still there, it wasn't.That's a consistent theme for you on these boards: frequently wrong, but seldom in doubt.
You are still describing a completely different thing. If I take the chair, the actual chair is gone. That's theft. I'm talking about leaving the chair where it is, and making a copy of it.Who said anything about communism? This has nothing to do with politics or anyone's equal share. I'm talking about the meaning of a word. Now we can add synonym to the list of words you don't understand.I've created plenty. It's what I do for a living. Much of it is readily found on...
See that example is exactly why you (and other posters in this thread) are completely wrong about what is or is not theft. If I kidnap someone, the only example that exists of that child is now gone. Another kid, is a different kid. Making an unauthorized copy does not take the original away, it leaves it intact where and how it was.No it isn't, not at all. I am not in anyway saying that an offence has not occurred when someone makes an unauthorized copy of something.
New Posts  All Forums: