[CamperBob]

You can use whatever term you want for the behavior -- we all know what it is and why it isn't right and it is just as wrong as stealing IMO.

But when does the theft actually take place? When I download the content? That's obviously a victimless crime, up until the point I derive value from what I 'stole' by watching it. At that point, what have I done that's any different from checking a book out of a library, where a vast number of readers can derive value from a limited number of purchased copies?

Words, like laws, sometimes outlive their relevance.

[fnid2]

Yes, when you download it. Specifically, when you acquire possession of the material. If you steal someone's money, but don't spend it, you still stole it.

It's not a victimless crime. The victim is the artist who should have received compensation for your acquisition of the material.

Some laws do outlive their relevance, but these laws are just as relevant today as they were when the printing press was invented or audio recording devices.

Guns made murder easier, but not more legal -- or more moral.

[CamperBob]

If you steal someone's money, but don't spend it, you still stole it.

Don't be ridiculous.

The victim is the artist who should have received compensation for your acquisition of the material.

How is someone victimized by the presence of a particular arrangement of magnetic dipoles on my hard-disk platter? The only way an artist can lose anything they're rightfully entitled to is if someone experiences what they've created without paying for it.

Guns made murder easier, but not more legal -- or more moral.

You've clearly thought this issue through, I can tell.