Money is imaginary too - taking a piece of paper isn't really stealing? This whole pedantic argument has been used to rationalize stiffing artists for their work for decades, and its tiresome.
Edit: Actually, now that I think about it, you might have to steal it to make the copy. Your analogy is useless for this argument. Money might be an abstract concept but bills and coins aren't imaginary. Try an analogy with digital currency then maybe there be something to talk about, but I'm guessing anything you can come up with will actually be talking about "hacking" or "fraud", not "stealing".
Your argument would have more power if music weren't freely available on the radio. And if someone else paid for the music and played it, I can listen to it for "free" as well.
Musicians are stiffed by the record labels, not by the fans. The fans are the ones that keep them rich, keep them popular, buy their shirts and go to their $200/seat concerts. At worst, their records are loss-leaders for an even more lucrative business.
> Your argument would have more power if music weren't freely available on the radio.
It used to be common practice for governments to tax owners of radios (and TV sets later on). So music certainly hasn't always been freely available on the radio.
That being said, if you're sending EM waves through my property, why the hell shouldn't I be allowed tp copy them?
Edit: Actually, now that I think about it, you might have to steal it to make the copy. Your analogy is useless for this argument. Money might be an abstract concept but bills and coins aren't imaginary. Try an analogy with digital currency then maybe there be something to talk about, but I'm guessing anything you can come up with will actually be talking about "hacking" or "fraud", not "stealing".