[photonerd]

Charlie certainly was (he took a copy from Bob).

Bob is the distributor in this context however. In most Berne convention states he broke copyright law (technically, but nothing would happen)

Together Bob & Charlie gained or acquired a picture produced by Alice’s work effort that was unauthorized.

That’s stealing. Is it a big deal? Probably not. Still stealing.

[kthejoker2]

So close and then the stealing part slipped back in.

We have a separate term already for the right to copy something - copyright.

We have a term for copying something without that right- copyright infringement.

Not theft. Copyright infringement.

[Nursie]

Alice still has it, so it’s not stealing as commonly understood.

I’d say the opposite - it could still be a huge deal to Alice, but it doesn’t meet the definition of stealing or theft.

[jdright]

as you said, he broke copyright law. that is copyright infringement, it is not theft.