[deepspace]

I would argue that the "stealing" does not happen at the time of download; after all the photos are free to view on Flickr as many times as you want, and your browser needs to 'download' them in order to show them to you. Saving a copy to your own hard drive for offline viewing does not fundamentally change that interaction.

It is only when you re-publish the photos that it becomes theft of intellectual property.

[M2Ys4U]

Either way it's not "theft", as the original owner of the exclusive rights to copy (etc.) the work still has those rights.

After all that's what the "property" in "intellectual property" is - the bundle of exclusive rights. Owners of those rights aren't deprived of them by somebody copying the works over which the rights exist.

[0xf8]

Try convincing the RIAA of your (perfectly valid IMO) argument...

[michaelmior]

I would agree with that, although it could still be the case where a tool which technically does not violate any laws is still used to ultimately facilitate illegal activity. In which case I think it would be reasonable for a platform to ban the use of such a tool.