Is it theft
- Thread starter Merkavar
- Start date
Recommended Videos
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.klown said:
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
If you leave money on the table since employees are nowhere to be found, then, that's not a theft.
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.
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.
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.Catrixa said:
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.
It's not that you lost the money. It's more that you never got it to begin with. Not really the same thing.BeerTent said:
Think of it as Karma for their awful business practices. Yeah, it's illegal, but damn if they don't deserve it.Baron_Rouge said:
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.DoomyMcDoom said:
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.
Well you have actually deprived them of produce there.Psykoma said:
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.
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.Kwil said:
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.
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.
Psykoma said:
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.
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.
...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.
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
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.webepoop said:
I disagree. I never got it in the end, sure... But you didn't pay the fee, yet your using my software without a license.Queen Michael said:
Also, stealing is defined as "Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it: "thieves stole her bicycle"." (And theft is defined as "The action or crime of stealing.") You never bought a license for either piece of software, therefore, you do not have the right to use software that I have helped build. Software that my company owns the source code. (If you have the source code, you own it.) Doesn't matter if you cracked past the EULA so you don't agree to it. It's not exactly easy to return a digital copy of something, so you never have the intention of returning either copy. (And don't you say that torrents are returning copies, you know who you have to return it to!)
It's certainly not the same things as "************ stole her bike!!" But in the long run, considering that a bike will run her $150. The 6351 Seeders and Leechers on a torrent file with my previous example can run a publisher $127020, My company $63510, and my royalties $317.55. If there were no such files, no method to download the game, I imagine at least half of those people downloading would buy the game. That's still a hefty sum of money.
No, it's not. EA screwed up. It's sounding like they gave one code to everyone and went honor system that they wouldn't use it more than once. They should have done is generate a 1 use coupon code on the spot, and given that to the user.
Yeah it is technically stealing but it's not as morally reprehensible as stealing from someones house just because the door was open. To say that it is would be to ignore all the other rules that would have to be deliberately broken through physical action, like trespassing.
Removal of the non-paid for games and an option to pay for them would be fitting. I don't think punishments should be handed out here really. EA just have to make sure their customers know that they can't be doing this sort of thing and in the future criminal charges may be brought, even if it is due to their cock up.
Removal of the non-paid for games and an option to pay for them would be fitting. I don't think punishments should be handed out here really. EA just have to make sure their customers know that they can't be doing this sort of thing and in the future criminal charges may be brought, even if it is due to their cock up.