Hacker News Reader

Comment by candlemas | Hacker News Reader

But technically that's stealing. I still feel a pang of guilt if I do it so I just use the free streaming services.

Theft, in plain english, is defined as the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive. Stealing is the act of theft.

technically it's "copyright infringement", not "stealing"

it's very much stealing from the residual based income of the workforce required to make your entertainment.

As mention in a comment above, it is not the consumer's responsibility to provide income to employees of a company providing goods or services. Please stop with this fallacy.

Company's providing goods and services in a capitalistic society are entirely dependent on consumers providing the income for their workforce.

How else do you really think this whole thing works. You get to keep your money, but still get all the goods and services provided. That's just silly.

You're conflating consumer responsibility with consumer spending. It's the company's job to provide wages - the company dictates and designs the means to acquire money to provide wages. If the company provides a widget that consumers don't want, is it the consumer's fault the company cannot pay the wages of the employees? That's just silly.

I'm saying "taking a service that you did not pay to receive" is stealing.

Technically stealing is depriving someone from his property which is not the case here. Also one should make a distinction between services. In the case of audiovisual content It can be consumed without changing anything in the life of the producer. I do not say that it’s a good thing but qualifying it of stealing does not seem right.

No country in the world legally classifies copyright infringement as stealing.

You can call it stealing metaphorically all you want, but it's not technically that (as candlemas claimed).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com