Is it theft

[BeerTent]

[...]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.

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.

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.

 

[mew4ever23]

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.

 

[Schtoobs]

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.

 

[chris11246]

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.

I see it more along the lines of, you go into a store, bring a bunch of items to the front, and the cashier doesn't ring all of it in, and lets you leave without paying for a bunch of stuff, that's not theft, that's an error on the side of the store/company in your favour, you have no legal obligation to return the items they neglected to charge you for, and the idiot on cash gets punished for being a dipshit.

No thats still theft just because someone messed up doesnt mean that you're allowed to take something without paying, although a lot of stores will give you the thing if its small enough to avoid a hassle and try to make you a repeat customer.

to OP: yes its theft, the coupon was stated to be one use only, even if it still worked after one use its not valid anymore.

 

[DoomyMcDoom]

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.

I see it more along the lines of, you go into a store, bring a bunch of items to the front, and the cashier doesn't ring all of it in, and lets you leave without paying for a bunch of stuff, that's not theft, that's an error on the side of the store/company in your favour, you have no legal obligation to return the items they neglected to charge you for, and the idiot on cash gets punished for being a dipshit.

No thats still theft just because someone messed up doesnt mean that you're allowed to take something without paying, although a lot of stores will give you the thing if its small enough to avoid a hassle and try to make you a repeat customer.

to OP: yes its theft, the coupon was stated to be one use only, even if it still worked after one use its not valid anymore.

What if it's a $1200 kayak? A friend of mine's co-worker fucked up a sales transaction and let a customer drive off with two kayaks while only charging them for one... the only action taken in this instance was the co-worker was fired outright... that is all... I'm pretty sure if it was something the retailer(who took a fairly big hit with that mistake) could have pursued, he would have, as to buy items of that price range at that location you had to submit your adress and phone number, as a part of the sales transaction(mainly for warrantee purposes, but it could have been used to ask for more money or the return of the unpayed for kayak).

 

[Kittyhawk]

The fault lays with EA here.

Its EA who pushed to have Origin, when we were happy to buy their physical games, but the call of more money and chasing Steams's market produced Origin. Remember, we never asked for it.

Its also up to EA to keep their servers and store access secure. If they have failed and people have got stuff for free, they have no one else to blame. Beef up your security, suck it up and move on. The online digital angle may allow them to shut those digi-copies off, remotely, though.

The smarter move would be to not penalise your customers for an EA era. Offer them to buy the games they got for free, at a discount, and nothing more will be said.

 

[chris11246]

snip
What if it's a $1200 kayak? A friend of mine's co-worker fucked up a sales transaction and let a customer drive off with two kayaks while only charging them for one... the only action taken in this instance was the co-worker was fired outright... that is all... I'm pretty sure if it was something the retailer(who took a fairly big hit with that mistake) could have pursued, he would have, as to buy items of that price range at that location you had to submit your adress and phone number, as a part of the sales transaction(mainly for warrantee purposes, but it could have been used to ask for more money or the return of the unpayed for kayak).

Because our legal system sucks. My mom owns a tack shop and has had people pay with checks that bounced. The first few times she sat for court for a few hours, just for them to not show up and the judge to tell her she won. Now even though she won she has still never seen the items or the money, she just wasted her time to be told she deserves it but will never see it. Thats why the dont go after the customer

 

[DoomyMcDoom]

snip
What if it's a $1200 kayak? A friend of mine's co-worker fucked up a sales transaction and let a customer drive off with two kayaks while only charging them for one... the only action taken in this instance was the co-worker was fired outright... that is all... I'm pretty sure if it was something the retailer(who took a fairly big hit with that mistake) could have pursued, he would have, as to buy items of that price range at that location you had to submit your adress and phone number, as a part of the sales transaction(mainly for warrantee purposes, but it could have been used to ask for more money or the return of the unpayed for kayak).

Because our legal system sucks. My mom owns a tack shop and has had people pay with checks that bounced. The first few times she sat for court for a few hours, just for them to not show up and the judge to tell her she won. Now even though she won she has still never seen the items or the money, she just wasted her time to be told she deserves it but will never see it. Thats why the dont go after the customer

Yeah, that does suck. We need to make some changes to the legal system, major revisions, y'know.

 

[Manji187]

I think if EA really wanted to, they could argue that it's unjust enrichment.

But they let it slide, because guess what; going after individuals like a money grubbin sonovabitch is bad publicity.

 

[klown]

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

I think your biggest problem is you are trying to compare it to other forms of stealing. This isn't like anything else in terms of normal theft. It is electronic, so there wasn't a loss of product. There wasn't really a loss of some kind of convenience or ability to use the product once it was stolen from you. Nobody could have gotten hurt in any way. So why should the punishment be anything other than deleting all the crap that people stole because of the bug and leave it at that?

Would you really want to press charges on a person who didn't really do anything besides waste a bit of your bandwidth and cause you to fix your own bug and the reproductions of it? The closest thing I can think of to this as a crime, would be if I left the door to my art studio open, and someone walked in and took a picture of a painting that I sell pictures of to keep for himself. He isn't causing me to lose any sales, didn't harm anyone or anything, he just got a free picture of something that I should have been able to sale. Why would I do anything more than just take back the picture and proceed to lock my door?

 

[Vegosiux]

No thats still theft just because someone messed up doesnt mean that you're allowed to take something without paying

Where do you live?

In my jurisdiction, if someone forgets to charge you something, you can walk away with it. Legally and legitimately. In a restaurant, if I order something and for example they forget to charge me for the dessert, I am not obliged to pay for it. Same goes for stores. I only have to pay for what's on the receipt. If the cashier missed an item, not my problem. I can be nice and poke them about it, but I don't have to.

 

[Catrixa]

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.

Sorry, I didn't mean to insinuate you were for or against any laws (I'm not even sure if the people who keep trying to pass those laws consider it "stealing" anymore. Then again, they're being written by people who openly admit to having no idea how the internet works, so I don't know if there's much in the way of thinking going on there); the ideas you were talking about just sounded similar to the reasoning behind them.

Personally, I agree that these sorts of things should be handled case-by-case, but I also think we need compromise:

In the case of Sony, I think people should have the right to put Linux on their Playstation, if that's what they bought it for. I personally think Sony should support this and find a way to keep their software from being pirated in this way, but I doubt they're going to come any time soon.

For the second one: I would not blame Linkin Park AT ALL if they said "For the love of God and all that is holy, please stop using our songs in your AMVs. Please. We're begging you here." Not one bit. I do think it would be a dick move on their part if they did say it, though. And some people will send out cease and desist letters if they catch you videotaping your cat (and posting it on Youtube) while their song is playing on the radio in the background. Honestly, I think there needs to be some compromise here. Maybe some form of limited license on a song you purchased (if it's pirated, you get no rights to play it).

On a similar note, the last two are less about the content creators and more about the community. Yeah, My Little Pony porn is about as creepy as you can get (minus the shock sites and the guy who ripped his own face off. Those usually win the *shudder* competition for me), but there's a community for it who like it and spend time creating it. Disallowed modding can also create communities for games that have long since fallen off the radar. The content creators might not get much out of these things (Blizzard gets nothing out of my terrible WoW fan art, but I get to have fun while waiting for stuff at work), but it keeps the communities surrounding their work alive.

Honestly, at the end of the day, I think people don't just want to sit and consume, I think they want to create and share what they've enjoyed about an IP (there was a TED talk about SOPA, which is where I'm getting this line from). And I think the content creators and communities should find some compromise where maybe not everyone gets what they want, but everyone gets something (maybe: "No mass production that enables pirating, but if you want to write a crappy fanfic, you are free to do so." Or something less stupid; this would take some thought and research).