Is it theft

[klown]

Also people seem to think that the games should just be removed. But isnt that like saying a car theif can just give back the car to avoid punishment.

I don't think that is within the same realm. I can steal your car because you left it unlocked, but it's still a crime and I am punished for the crime. EA had a bug in their system that people exploited to obtain things they were not meant to, but they didn't really commit a "crime". I think just removing the games, and fixing the bug should be enough for most people who didn't make any kind of illegal profit off of the bug.

Yes to me it's still stealing, but it's not worth any more punishment than just removing anything they stole from their system.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Yes It's theft but 'EA is evil' and 'Copyright is wrong' and 'electronic goods are special' so people aren't going to see it that way. Ea is going to easily be able to stop this by just looking up the payment method and removing the right to use every additional game bought after the first. Watch as people then claim EA is steal from them, despite it being quiet clear in their ToS that they can do this at their own discretion to anyone for any reason.

 

[Merkavar]

To the many that said that its not theft cause ea didn't lose possession. They lost the sales for one.

Basically if this wasn't a electronic product there wouldn't be any question of theft. Of not theft it's his brother fruad

 

[Merkavar]

Also people seem to think that the games should just be removed. But isnt that like saying a car theif can just give back the car to avoid punishment.

I don't think that is within the same realm. I can steal your car because you left it unlocked, but it's still a crime and I am punished for the crime. EA had a bug in their system that people exploited to obtain things they were not meant to, but they didn't really commit a "crime". I think just removing the games, and fixing the bug should be enough for most people who didn't make any kind of illegal profit off of the bug.

Yes to me it's still stealing, but it's not worth any more punishment than just removing anything they stole from their system.

Lets assume they stole 1 game that's anywhere from 50 to 100$. What if some stole 10 or 20 games. You getting up into the realm of holding up a petrol station. You think they should just give them back? So if I steal from people in small amounts its ok.


I think people are thinking along the lines of its electronic so it's not real and not a serious crime. But the numbers add up to what petty theft or worse

 

[Guffe]

Of course it is.
Explanation in the first comment is very good.
Just because someone messed up doesn't mean you're allowed to do something you normally are not to.

 

[nicolescott]

If you leave money on the table since employees are nowhere to be found, then, that's not a theft.

 

[Treblaine]

Under English Common Law (the basis of law in America, Canada, and UK) theft must include an "intention to deprive".

EA has "lost" nothing tangible, they have allowed a copy to be made, nothing has been deleted or damaged.

The only defence of infinitely copyable works is Copyright Law, and the letter of the law on copyright is ALL a matter of authorisation. If their network authorised it, then it is not fraud.

I don't consider piracy theft, I consider it fraud. Both wrong, but distinct infractions.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Some examples:
-People wanting to use their PS3 as a Linux server after that capability was removed by Sony. Is is wrong of that person to want a cheap, powerful Linux server? What if they bought the PS3, but didn't install it as their Linux box until after Sony pulled that capability? Should they still be denied the ability to use the device for the reasons they purchased it?
-You make a video of you skydiving and put it to a song you purchased. You then show all of your friends your video. You aren't using the song as the creator intended, but have you done anything wrong?
-You take characters and settings from a popular fantasy novel and write a new story about them, then post it on the internet on a fan site. The author didn't want someone else using their characters, but have you done anything wrong?
-You download a game with no built in mod capabilities, but want to add some new levels for you and your friends. The developer does not want their product to be edited, but you're getting more enjoyment out of the game they've made. Is this wrong?

Its not about using the product as it wasnt intended. Its about going directly against the specifically stated wishes of the creator. Which is usually a dick move. Its really more on a case by case basis.


First one morally grey, i was outraged by this too. The disrespect was first commited by the creator toward the customer by changing promises. Not really sure.

Second one definitely ok. Has the artist specifically said they dont want people to use their music over awesome things? Its not about intent. Its about the creator obviously not wanting you to do that or asking you not to do that.

Third one not so alright. The creator might make weird demands but at the end of the day its their work. And it shows, at the very least, a lack of respect for that person to defy their wishes to write something as trivial as fan fiction. Its not theft in any case but its more respect for the person who created something that you are enjoying. Its a lack of respect to treat peoples creations in a way they specifically asked you not to treat them.

Fourth one also not so alright. If the developer said specifically "Our game was not intended to mod please dont mod it" they're an idiot but they have every right to request that. And going against that wish is pretty disrespectful to the person who created the base content youre now enjoying with mods. I mean at the end of the day no real harm is being done with this fourth one or the third one. Its just about being nice to the person who created the content for you by listening to them and taking into account their wishes with their own created property.

In NO SCENARIO am i calling it theft. At all. So im not arguing for any laws. All my speculation is on what is or isnt a dick move or a lack of respect.

 

[Queen Michael]

[...]tl;dr: It's only theft when somebody loses a possession because somebody else took it. That's not what happened here.

[I also think this car analogy is awful, I'm sorry.]

But these people didn't technically take anything, they copied something.
[...]
I maintain that calling this stealing doesn't work.

The bolded text caught my eye here. While I don't think of what happened with EA is theft. (An error on their service.) Piracy is still theft. Although while nothing physical is lost, (Technically) money that normally would have been sent by legitimate buyers has been lost.

Sure, your only making a digital, non-existent copy of something, but for example, if you download(copy) my game, "Super awesome shooter guy," also a game you wanted pretty badly, I've lost a sale. I've lost the $20 my publisher would have made, and the royalties associated with that $20 purchase. Why would you buy a "Super awesome shooter guy" license? You've already enjoyed it.

Same goes with my $20 piece of software, "Office Editor." Why buy a license, when you have a working cracked copy?

My publisher will never see your $20 purchase, My company will not see $10, and the 5¢ from royalties in my personal wallet will never be. I would constitute that as theft.

It's not that you lost the money. It's more that you never got it to begin with. Not really the same thing.

 

[Genocidicles]

snip

Think of it as Karma for their awful business practices. Yeah, it's illegal, but damn if they don't deserve it.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Not if you didn't hide the goods, and the person at the til saw them and actively did not charge you for them, that is their mistake, not yours...

For you logic to hold, the person at the till would have to be aware that they were giving goods away and also be the legal owners of the goods. In most circumstances you could conjure, at least one of those is not upheld. In the case where both points are upheld, it qualifies as a gift.

That you likely wouldn't be caught or that there would be no ramifications has little to do with the legality of the situation. Walking away without paying and without being freely given the item as a gift is theft.

 

[Treblaine]

If you walk into a store, the employees are nowhere to be found, the security scanner at the doors isn't working that day, and you walk out without paying for a dozen games in your hands, is it theft? You're only able to do it because the company screwed up, so it can't be theft right?
No, it's still theft, even if the company screwed up thier security procedures.



Yes, they exploited the glitch to steal the games.

Well you have actually deprived them of produce there.

That has happened, it has happened during riots (English August Riots of 2011) shops were abandoned and raided, left with "no employees around" mainly because there were marauding violent gangs and the police had utterly retreated.

Just because there isn't resistance to a theft, doesn't mean it isn't theft. If a nice old lady leaves her bicycle outside a post office as she totters in to buy a stamp, you can't say "should'a locked up your bike ya dumb *****" and ride off with it acting like you've done nothing wrong.

Now this is a lot more like if a manager of a general store leaned on the keyboard one day and set the price of all his produce to "zero dollars" and the next day clueless employees just let everyone pick up stuff and pay the low-low price of "zero" because that's the price the manager set for them.

Except no actual produce was lost with EA, they just allowed copies to be made. In that case it's more like a cinema accidentally selling tickets for zero dollars and everyone buying them and the cinema actually honouring those zero-dollar tickets sold.

 

[Vegosiux]

Bullshit. The idea of somebody needing to lose anything for it to be theft only came into being when pirates wanted to justify their behavior.

Oh no, actually that idea of "theft" existed since "property" did. From the dawn of mankind, when one guy stole something, that meant another guy was physically deprived of it.

Theft is simply taking something that isn't yours without permission.

Wanna bet?

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.31.htm

That's just one example of how "theft" is defined. In any case, your shot was so wide off the mark that Sergio Ramos looks like he only kicked a near miss. But hey, don't let reality get in the way...

So, to answer the OP and everyone else for that matter, follow these simple steps.

1) Locate an official source on legislation in your jurisdiction.
2) Within said source, find the penal laws and look up definitions of "theft".
3) See if the example fits the law - if it does, proceed to 4). If it does not, proceed to 5).
4) It is theft.
5) It is not theft. Optionally you can try to look up which offense it actually is.

And presto, there you have it.

 

[Fasckira]

People; we have to stop applying terms that don't fit.

The world needs more people who think like you, I tip my hat to you good sir.

 

[Lee Black]

Judgement would have to be yes it's theft but for a sentence/punishment you have to consider actual harm done which in this case is pretty minor and the "victim" (in this case being EA) does get a say in and has chosen to let it slide therefore I say case closed.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

If you walk into a store, the employees are nowhere to be found, the security scanner at the doors isn't working that day, and you walk out without paying for a dozen games in your hands, is it theft? You're only able to do it because the company screwed up, so it can't be theft right?
No, it's still theft, even if the company screwed up thier security procedures.



Yes, they exploited the glitch to steal the games.

Actually this is more like, the employees were only meant to a sign saying "free" on one pile of items but instead they put it on EVERY pile of items.

It's not stealing if it says it's free.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

The thing is though, this is all above board. It's not taking advantage of an unattended shop with no working scanners, because no-one has ENABLED you to steal things, just disabled the means of detecting it. EA on the other hand unwittingly GAVE people access. Same thing with money in the wrong account, the bank has screwed up but it still isn't your money.

...actually no, thought train derailed. It is stealing, because it is implied that the games are not meant to be downloaded for free as much as it is implied that accidental transfers of money to your account are not on purpose. But the punishment should be negation if anything, you cannot punish others for your own incompetence.

 

[Bagged Milk]

I haven't read the previous posts. so, sorry if I'm just repeating.

I don't think of it as theft. Imagine if there was a secret password at Gamestop (or your area's game store) that got you a free twenty dollar game. Anyone can come in and use that password. However, they only told a few people what it was. People then spread that password around, thereby giving everyone a free game. However, because Gamestop was stupid, they decided not to keep track of who used the password and who didn't, so you can go in and use it multiple times. This is just taking advantage of them not thinking the entire thing through.

This is not the same as a store leaving it's doors unlocked. Because that would be stealing. If EA had left a blatantly obvious security breach that allowed people to get games for free, yeah, that's also stealing.

Captcha:
red-handed

 

[Nielas]

I haven't read the previous posts. so, sorry if I'm just repeating.

I don't think of it as theft. Imagine if there was a secret password at Gamestop (or your area's game store) that got you a free twenty dollar game. Anyone can come in and use that password. However, they only told a few people what it was. People then spread that password around, thereby giving everyone a free game. However, because Gamestop was stupid, they decided not to keep track of who used the password and who didn't, so you can go in and use it multiple times. This is just taking advantage of them not thinking the entire thing through.

This is not the same as a store leaving it's doors unlocked. Because that would be stealing. If EA had left a blatantly obvious security breach that allowed people to get games for free, yeah, that's also stealing.

Captcha:
red-handed

It is probably best to think of this as fraud. The customers knew that the codes were one-use-only but they tricked the system into giving them multiple discounts. I would compare it to a customer switching price stickers on an item and the cashier ringing it at that price.