check out FACT (Federation Against Copyright Theft), Thank you for the link, I did check it out. I understand that emotions run deep on this issue, and I was not trying to offend anyone, or to defend copyright infringement. But it has been my experience that the more emotional an issue has become the less helpful misleading statements are. I was not aware that in the UK people charged with copyright infringement are actually charged in court with theft and if convicted sentenced on charges of theft rather than copyright infringement. I stand corrected. I guess I am not the only person who labors under the misconception that theft requires loss of use, a quick google turned up, "The biggest problem with the spokesperson for the RIAA's statement is that there was absolutely NO theft going on. Copyright infringement, perhaps, but not theft (or thievery). Theft has a strict definition as does copyright infringement. The xxAA continues to hammer home the idea that they are equal. In neither moral nor legal terms are they so. Theft requires a party to deprive another party of the use of something. For instance, if I steal your TV, you no longer have the use of the TV. If I download the latest song from whatever crappy band is hot right now, there is no loss of use of that song by anyone much less the RIAA/Label/Band. Of course, the media continues to let the xxAA get away with muddying the water by using theft as a synonym for copyright infringement."