Is Stealing something digital the same as stealing something physical?

For example some of us download a lot of IM courses for free on this forum or elsewhere would you classify this as stealing or sharing?

Streaming sporting events on free streaming sites instead of paying for pay per view to watch a boxing match or something again shady line...it's technically stealing but is it really?

@oatmeal what do you think?

Yes! That's only copyrights taking place

In my opinion, If you are stealing someone's data and sharing with other people to make money then it's stealing. But if you are watching online videos for free instead of taking membership then it's not robbery.

TheVigilante said:

For example some of us download a lot of IM courses for free on this forum or elsewhere would you classify this as stealing or sharing?

Streaming sporting events on free streaming sites instead of paying for pay per view to watch a boxing match or something again shady line...it's technically stealing but is it really?

@oatmeal what do you think?

Click to expand...

Sometimes worse. Like the time when DMCA and the film Dallas Buyers Club tried to sue individuals tens of millions for downloading it years ago. Whereas if you just stole it from your local blockbuster you would just get a warning.

Lol like pestering @Festinger to share paid plugins if they’re under gpl license it’s fine i think

No it's not, at least to me.

Thriveink said:

In my opinion, If you are stealing someone's data and sharing with other people to make money then it's stealing. But if you are watching online videos for free instead of taking membership then it's not robbery.

Click to expand...

Interesting way of thinking. So, do you also think it’s fine to steal let’s say food and clothes for personal use?

Yup, its crime and you can end up in jail if you are going big.

Nut-Nights said:

Yup, its crime and you can end up in jail if you are going big.

Click to expand...

Stop scaring me childrenz!

Depends what you're stealing, if it's something everyone already has then why not but if it's something someone put work, cash and time into then it'd be a bit scummy

Ultimately if I can afford and find value in it, I pay.
For example, I pay for Netflix even though i can download torrents. Same goes for Spotify.

When it comes to books. There are tons and tons of shitty books. What I normally do is, i pirate and read a chapter or two. If i find value in it. I'd buy kindle/audiobook version of it. (Recently bought "48 laws of power" by Robert Greene - OMG what a book)

When it comes to themes and plugins - you should never go cheap. It is not worth the risk.

Generally, I download to test them first.
If I like the product I end up buying them.

Good question. I think that can only be truly answered if you download or view content that was stolen by the person sharing it. If the person paid for it, it's difficult to see it as stealing, however if the access was intended for only that user you could argue it is. Either way it's frowned upon by authorities and companies and in some cases there are laws in regards to that also.

To answer your original question if it's the same. One example could be using a train ticket to enter through a turnstile at a station, if it was a weekly pass you could then pass that ticket to a friend to allow them to enter also. The original ticket is intended for you, but another person has benefited and the company would consider that stealing.

Grey area these days.

Stealing is stealing. Stealing + Sharing, is even worse, because now this theft gets multiplied. It's easier to not feel as bad (or perhaps bad at all) when doing it online, because there are so many reasons you can give yourself, as to why it's "okay". I buy things when I can. That being said, there was a time when I wore the proverbial eye patch, so I get it.

It's not the same. I against stealing something physical, but pro for stealing digital contents.

This is a blackhat forum and we are members here, it's too late to question our moral code.

Morality wise: stealing is stealing.
But logical/rationale this is the problem I have:

If you steal something physical such as a chair, well somebody put hard work into physically building that chair with their bare hands and used their sweat, blood, and tears, to make it. They also had to use up physical resources such as wood, machinery, tools, etc to build it. So physical resources have been used up and physical resources are LIMITED. So there is an intrinsic value to that. I'm more against these kinds of theft. More examples: stealing a car, phones, computers, artwork, pets, kidnapping humans, etc.

But when it comes to digital, it's more tricky. Yes, intellectual rights matter (if it was someone's ideas, words, stuff like that), you don't want to plagiarize or take credit for someone else's work or idea. But if it's downloading a movie (not to profit but just to enjoy as leisure), making digital copies of the movie doesn't cost anyone anything. No resources are being used up for making 20 million digital copies of a movie or making only 50,000 copies. It's digital. Yes, there was initial physical resources required to make the movie and costs that come with that, but pretty much if the movie was good, they will have made millions off it. I don't think of it as stealing if you download or watch a movie for free online. They already got paid, they already got their value, everything else that is happening afterwards is just non-existent magic poof made out of the air.

For example, why does it mean more to the world if a real human being is killed vs a digital human being in a video game that is killed? Because one has real intrinsic value and worth while the other does not. A video game human can be created, re-created, multiplied by 10 quadrillion times and it would not affect or change anything. You can't do the same with a real human being. So if I kill a digital copy of a human being in a video game, does that make me a murderer/killer? (maybe it does morality wise because just thinking of wanting to kill arguably crosses the line).

That's the way I see it. If I'm downloading a movie for free is that really stealing? But if I went into the studio building and stole the original and only copy of the real movie on film, yes, that is the kind of stealing I would not condone.

somehow yes, not that big crime or should be count tho
some of the little things that human beings do, which has a bigger impact as a group than individually

oatmeal said:

but pretty much if the movie was good, they will have made millions off it.

Click to expand...

oatmeal said:

They already got paid, they already got their value, everything else that is happening afterwards is just non-existent magic poof made out of the air.

Click to expand...

I believe this is the logic that's so easy to adopt, but simultaneously, is at the very root of the debate and moral compass.
This becomes the issue in which, who are you to determine whether or not they've "got their value"?
As I said, I understand, and by "you", I don't mean you, specifically. Rather, I mean anyone who feels this way (once upon a time, myself included, and admittedly sometimes I still may feel like this, though just not nearly as often).

For example, someone creates a Wordpress Plugin. It's a premium plugin as it cost money to hire professionals to build and maintain the plugin / add new features / etc, and these are ongoing costs. It costs money to have the marketing material created, the sales copy written, the videos created / edited, the hosting fees, and whatever costs may be associated. He releases the plugin to the market and some people have a chance to try it out. He / She finally starts to make some of the money back. That's the return on their ongoing investment. They make some money back, or perhaps they get lucky and make all of it back. We don't know. Somewhere along the way, someone else decides to make the plugin freely available to hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of other people, free of cost. This is money that's ultimately being stolen from the owner / developer(s) / content creators / etc. Without the money, there are fewer and fewer updates, until eventually the project gets shut down due to lack of sustainability. All the pirates are happy because they got free software. New patches have happened and thus the plugin becomes outdated and so now these pirates are desperately in search of the next plugin to do what the original plugin no longer can. All this would have been avoided by simply paying for the plugin and keeping the development staff paid.

Dribber said:

This is a blackhat forum and we are members here, it's too late to question our moral code.

Click to expand...

No it's not. That's why, for example, we have this. Sure it's a bit dated, but there's a reason for why this was created.

Toz said:

I believe this is the logic that's so easy to adopt, but simultaneously, is at the very root of the debate and moral compass.
This becomes the issue in which, who are you to determine whether or not they've "got their value"?
As I said, I understand, and by "you", I don't mean you, specifically. Rather, I mean anyone who feels this way (once upon a time, myself included, and admittedly sometimes I still may feel like this, though just not nearly as often).

Click to expand...

Yes, there is no actual answer to the "got their value" question.

I'm not sure but most people here probably don't remember when the US movies used to make 90% of their box office revenue from North America only (Canada and US).

I remember those times and it wasn't that long ago.

Suddenly, America is able to export their movies to half the globe and put them in thousands of theaters worldwide and now they are making 70% or more of their total gross from international gross than domestic.

They didn't do any extra work. It's the same movie. The only difference now is that they were able to get the world's market share instead of just North America and now they make so much more money than they used to. I remember when Waterworld came out as the most expensive film made at $200 million and it only gross like $100 million but that was because it was only shown in America. If it had been shown to 80 other countries in the world, the world's biggest movie grossing loser would have actually still made a good size profit simply because the market share is so much bigger but the movie itself hasn't changed at all.

So there is no rule as to how much or how little something should be valued at. Markets determine it but even markets is a very loose term because that has a lot of factors too that is not concrete.