It shouldn't be referred to as "piracy". Piracy involves people on boats with guns robbing cruise liners, freighters etc. It also shouldn't be referred to as "theft". Theft involves non-consensual removal of a physical object. Even referring to it as "deprivation of revenue" is dubious, as there is no guarantee that someone who copies a movie or song would have purchased whatever it is which was copied.
What this
is, is copyright infringement. It is immoral, yes, but to call it any of the terms listed above is to demonise it. Morally, I would say that for the end user its about as bad as dropping an empty soft drink can, not putting a dollar into the parking meter, or going 3 or 4kms over the speed limit.
Punishments typically meted out by governments around the world to the end user are highly disproportional to the crime. Would $20,000 and a three-month driving ban seem fair for a third parking ticket? No. So why should end-users be subject to this sort of bullshit? Why do movie & recording companies get such "special protection" for their industry?
Note: I'm only talking about little Johnny here downloading the latest Rihanna song or whatever, not massive DVD-copying sweatshops. Thats a completely different ballgame.
Last edited by Pubic (2011-12-28 01:19:26)