[Ruudjah]

Theft means you take something away. You don't take something away when you copy the execution. As such, it cannot be theft. The counterargument that you take away revenue is hypothetical at best, and still not taking something physical directly away from the owner.

You contradict yourself when stating innovation is improving current executions of ideas. Too much of this, and suddenly it's something called theft?

If you merely copy the execution of the competition 1:1, you won't win over your competitor. You need to offer a key advantage. That's where the innovation takes place: the small step differentiating your execution from the original. In doing so, you don't steal, but add something. Adding something can never be stealing.

[kristofferR]

If we're talking about the term theft in the practical sense (and not the legal sense), I don't agree that theft necessarily have to take something away from those you steal from. Theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's consent. This doesn't have to be physical stuff, it can also include digital properties like copyrighted material.

> You contradict yourself when stating innovation is improving current executions of ideas. Too much of this, and suddenly it's something called theft?

No, you got it all wrong. I argue that too little improvement of current executions is theft. I can't clone Facebook completely, change the logo, add a dislike button and then call it my own. That's theft, not innovation. However, I could take all the best ideas from Facebook, from Twitter, Gowalla etc. and create a unique social network I could call my own.

> If you merely copy the execution of the competition 1:1, you won't win over your competitor. You need to offer a key advantage. That's where the innovation takes place: the small step differentiating your execution from the original. In doing so, you don't steal, but add something. Adding something can never be stealing.

Well, you actually don't necessarily need a better and improved product. The only thing you need to succeed as a clone is better marketing.

I think we actually agree that innovation is just improvement on the current execution.

[bediger]

I'd argue that "copyright" isn't a natural right like possession of property, and therefore you really can't steal copyrighted material.

If I grab your book while you're not looking, and xerox a few pages, I've copied some copyright material. Once I put the book back, YOU CAN'T TELL I'VE DONE IT. That's unlike actually removing the book from your posession. You can tell I've done that.

If you can't tell I've done it, it isn't theft. It's something else. All the laws in the world don't make it otherwise.

[kristofferR]

Agree, but that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about copying something and calling it your own.

Copying a book for yourself is one thing, releasing a copy with another name and some minor additions and calling it your own is another thing.

[tzs]

> Theft means you take something away

Counterexample: theft of services.