It's not the same as stealing. When you steal something the person who formerly had it no longer has it. This term is commonly used inappropriately when talking about software and media licensing.
Well, we can split hairs on language, but 'steal' - 'to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully'. This pretty much sums up the situation described by the article.
Notice that I'm not making some philosophical point about software, I'm saying if the license to something says that you must have purchased it to use it, to use it without said license is to "appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully".
"Take" has so many meanings it's ridiculous. It doesn't imply just one thing, it implies several. You take after your father. Did you take the test? She didn't take much time. He took quite a beating. I took a dump. We'll take a look at it. I'll take a stab at it.
"Appropriate", the verb, is also flexible and also does not imply depriving someone of something. You can "appropriate" something when you create art, and you can be accused of "cultural appropriation", but in neither case is anyone deprived of what you appropriated.
So shut up. The argument about semantics is shit and you should stop repeating it.
No, the people who use 'stealing' hoping for an easy emotional victory should stop trying to manipulate everyone endlessly. Stop using tainted words and simply make an argument.
Is it? It seems like it's an argument used exclusively to derail conversations it's tangentially related to like the piracy equivalent of a grammar nazi.
