Hacker News Reader

Comment by 6d6b73 | Hacker News Reader

While you're not stealing in a sense that you're taking something physical, you are stealing in a sense that you are not compensating author for their work. Let's say you are graphics designer. You are hired to create logo for a company. Company likes your work and they just copy the file you've sent to them but they decided they are not going to pay you. Are they stealing from you or is it "just" copyright infringement ?

View on HN

Sure, and when I don't hire you, that means that you won't have money to buy food, so you will starve. So, I am not murdering you in the sense that I am shooting you, but I am murdering you in the sense that I am not hiring you.

Words have commonly accepted definitions, and copyright or contract violation simply does not fall under theft. "I think it's bad, theft is bad, therefore, it's theft" just is an incoherent argument. Just as not hiring you is not murder, even if it in the end were to somehow contribute to you dying.

Oh, so if you go to a dealer and took the car that you never wanted to buy because it's too expensive, only for a one drive, without asking anyone you were not stealing because this would not deprive anyone of any money?

If you use someone's property without authorization, but don't intend to deprive them of it permanently, that indeed in most jurisdictions is not theft, that is criminal conversion.

It's really not that difficult, you can simply look up what these terms mean instead of inventing your own definitions. "Depriving someone of money" is not the definition of theft. And it not only isn't, it would be a braindead definition if it were. Suddenly, buying from your competitor would be theft. Accidentally dropping your dishes would be theft. Pretty much everything would be theft under that definition.

> Accidentally dropping your dishes would be theft.

And not dropping them would be, as well!

You're getting closer, but for the analogy to work then you had consent from the dealership, and the car manufacturer is suing both of you.

Except you're not actually being sued by the manufacturer either, you're actually being sued by the manufacturer's delivery company.

> Oh, so if you go to a dealer and took the car that you never wanted to buy because it's too expensive, only for a one drive, without asking anyone you were not stealing

Well, sure, that would be joyriding rather than vehicular theft. Still a crime. [0]

[0] http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal...

That would be a breach of the contract between designer and the company. If you quote someone a rate, they agree, you do the work, but they don't pay you, then you can sue them regardless of whether a copyrightable work was created.

Copyright infringement without breach of contract is more like people stealing the Transmit logo https://panic.com/extras/ripoff/

Isn't it breach of contract when you copy tv show, when it clearly states that copying of that show is prohibited? When you buy that dvd, book or whatever it is, you agree to the 'terms' which usually say - copy in any form shape or size prohibited.

Actually, when you buy a dvd or book, you usually aren't bound by any terms in any booklet acompanying it or printed in the book or whatever. If at all, you are bound by any terms that you agreed to (which in particular would require you to be aware of them and to have had the opportunity to read them and all that). Which in the case of a typical sales contract that's the result of buying something in a shop means that pretty much the only thing you are bound by is your agreement to pay the price that you agreed to. Stuff that you get to read afterwards cannot become part of the contract that you previously agreed to unless you explicitly were to agree to adding those additional terms afterwards. Also, that sales contract is between you and the shop.

So, no, actually, whatever you do with that book or dvd, if you paid the price you agreed to, you almost always can do with it whatever you like, unless it is illegal. But just as using a chainsaw you bought and paid for to murder someone is not a breach of contract, so is not copying a book you bought.

And in any case, a breach of contract is not theft. It's a breach of contract. That's why we have a separate term for it. Just as destruction of property is not theft. It's destruction of property.

Plus, if you download an unauthorized copy somewhere, you most likely don't have a contract with anyone regarding the thing that you are downloading, so you could not possibly be in violation of the terms of that non-existent contract.

Shitty click wrap that nobody should care about. Why are you bootlicking so hard?

Isn't it breach of contract when you copy tv show, when it clearly states that copying of that show is prohibited?

Yes! And breach of contract is not theft.

And presumably, if I pirate something, I never entered into that contract to begin with.

Apples and oranges, that comparison makes no sense. On the topic of media copying your example would be more like another company re-using the same logo after the creator was paid.

Calling copyright infringement "stealing" is not much different then calling it "theft".

1) If you are hired by a company and did not get paid it has nothing to do with copyright. 2) If you hired by a company and created some work you never owned a copyright.

In case of movies, i didn't hire anyone to create the movie. Also, i would never buy that movie so they lost nothing.

If a graphic designer is hired to do something for someone, it is usually agreed beforehand how much money he will get for the job. If he doesn't get the money, it is simply a breach of agreement.

If you copy something with "coping prohibited" you're also in a breach of agreement, whether you agree with it or not.

Is it theft to sit and listen right outside an open-air concert?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com