The precepts talk about "taking what is not given", and I always thought that included picking stuff up from the ground.
This interpretation would seem to be from the purist end of the spectrum, which is helpful. But if I pick up a dollar from the ground, then I have it and nobody else does. In the case of digital information, it can be copied infinitely. Nobody is deprived of having the data. In fact, it's shared even more. In a few cases, the creator may be deprived of payment, but those may be exceptions. Many times, a downloader could just borrow it some other way, or would just look for other free options. So, I agree with Dauphin that stealing is probably too strong a term for what most downloaders are doing. And from the point of view of legality, I would not be in favor of criminalizing file sharing.
On the other hand, "not taking what is not given" seems to suggest a greater challenge to let go of taking almost to the point of letting go of having altogether. I think this is where my question comes from. It's not that I'm stealing, but that I'm consuming.
It's interesting that the file-sharing phenomenon has had so much influence, and the end-result seems to be much more voluntary sharing from writers, musicians, etc. Most have found other ways to monetize their work. There may be fewer making millions, but my guess is there are many more finding an audience than they might under conventional capitalist circumstances. This seems like a pretty wholesome outcome.
Edit: figuring out the formatting.