1. Why is online piracy ethically different from
theft?
A vignette experiment.
Wojciech Hardy, Michał Krawczyk, Joanna Tyrowicz
Group for Research in APplied Economics

2. Introduction: If you download you’re a thief!
2

3. Introduction: If you download you’re a thief!
„When you go online and download songs without permission, you
are stealing. The illegal downloading of music is just as wrong as
shoplifting from a local convenience store (…)”
---RIAA, Official stance on piracy (until 2011)
[1]
2

4. Introduction: If you download you’re a thief!
„When you go online and download songs without permission, you
are stealing. The illegal downloading of music is just as wrong as
shoplifting from a local convenience store (…)”
---RIAA, Official stance on piracy (until 2011)
[1]
2
„Piracy is theft, and pirates are thieves, plain and simple.
Downloading a movie off of the Internet is the same as taking a
DVD off a store shelf without paying for it.”
---MPAA, What is Internet piracy? (until 2010)
[2]

5. Introduction: If you download you’re a thief!
„When you go online and download songs without permission, you
are stealing. The illegal downloading of music is just as wrong as
shoplifting from a local convenience store (…)”
---RIAA, Official stance on piracy (until 2011)
[1]
2
„It's as if we were advising people on how to steal from
supermarkets (...) Everything's alright in the legal terms, but,
without any doubts, this IS stealing from artists and - I repeat - is
causing harm to culture.”
--- Bogusław Pluta, director of ZPAV (2012) [3]
„Piracy is theft, and pirates are thieves, plain and simple.
Downloading a movie off of the Internet is the same as taking a
DVD off a store shelf without paying for it.”
---MPAA, What is Internet piracy? (until 2010)
[2]

6. And the views of the society?
3

7. And the views of the society?
3
Source: http://piracy.americanassembly.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/AA-Research-Note-Infringement-and-
Enforcement-November-2011.pdf

8. And the views of the society?
Definitely not the same percentage of people that steal from shops
(at least I hope so ).
So what is it that actually makes the difference?
3
Source: http://piracy.americanassembly.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/AA-Research-Note-Infringement-and-
Enforcement-November-2011.pdf

9. Common reasons for piracy:
4






10. Common reasons for piracy:
4
 There is no loss if you copy something. [4] [5]





11. Common reasons for piracy:
4
 There is no loss if you copy something. [4] [5]
 Why not copy if there’s no available alternative. [6]




12. Common reasons for piracy:
4
 There is no loss if you copy something. [4] [5]
 Why not copy if there’s no available alternative. [6]
 They are just some big capitalist companies, who won’t receive my few dollars.[6] [7]



13. Common reasons for piracy:
4
 There is no loss if you copy something. [4] [5]
 Why not copy if there’s no available alternative. [6]
 They are just some big capitalist companies, who won’t receive my few dollars.[6] [7]
 It requires no effort at all to make a copy. [8] [9]


14. Common reasons for piracy:
4
 There is no loss if you copy something. [4] [5]
 Why not copy if there’s no available alternative. [6]
 They are just some big capitalist companies, who won’t receive my few dollars.[6] [7]
 It requires no effort at all to make a copy. [8] [9]
 It’s much easier when you don’t have to look the victim in the eye. [10]

15. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?












16. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.











17. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.










18. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:









19. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:
 Loss








20. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:
 Loss
 Physicality







21. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:
 Loss
 Physicality
 Alternative






22. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:
 Loss
 Physicality
 Alternative
 Peer





23. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:
 Loss
 Physicality
 Alternative
 Peer
 Sharing




24. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:
 Loss
 Physicality
 Alternative
 Peer
 Sharing
 Protection



25. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:
 Loss
 Physicality
 Alternative
 Peer
 Sharing
 Protection
 Responders are asked to rate the stories.


26. To address the question:
5
What is the difference that makes the difference?
 We tell hypothetical stories about one Johnny, who committed
various, questionable acts to acquire a TV series.
 The stories’ design is based on six dimensions that cover
important factors raised in the debate around piracy.
 These are:
 Loss
 Physicality
 Alternative
 Peer
 Sharing
 Protection
 Responders are asked to rate the stories.
 Additional questions on personal behaviour and demographics.

27. Let’s take a few things into account first
6
Vignette experiments









28. Let’s take a few things into account first
6
Vignette experiments
 Hypothetical situations that the responders judge, evaluate, etc. [11]








29. Let’s take a few things into account first
6
Vignette experiments
 Hypothetical situations that the responders judge, evaluate, etc. [11]
 Very popular when analyzing controversial choices, like: violence in
patient-doctor relationship
[12]
, alcohol related sexual abuse
[13]
,
classroom cheating
[14]
, or types of theft
[15]
).







30. Let’s take a few things into account first
6
Vignette experiments
 Hypothetical situations that the responders judge, evaluate, etc. [11]
 Very popular when analyzing controversial choices, like: violence in
patient-doctor relationship
[12]
, alcohol related sexual abuse
[13]
,
classroom cheating
[14]
, or types of theft
[15]
).
 Types of theft – Green (2012)
[15]
.






31. Let’s take a few things into account first
6
Vignette experiments
 Hypothetical situations that the responders judge, evaluate, etc. [11]
 Very popular when analyzing controversial choices, like: violence in
patient-doctor relationship
[12]
, alcohol related sexual abuse
[13]
,
classroom cheating
[14]
, or types of theft
[15]
).
 Types of theft – Green (2012)
[15]
.
 Sometimes on piracy, but mostly software and not culture
[16] [17]
.
On cultural goods piracy




32. Let’s take a few things into account first
6
Vignette experiments
 Hypothetical situations that the responders judge, evaluate, etc. [11]
 Very popular when analyzing controversial choices, like: violence in
patient-doctor relationship
[12]
, alcohol related sexual abuse
[13]
,
classroom cheating
[14]
, or types of theft
[15]
).
 Types of theft – Green (2012)
[15]
.
 Sometimes on piracy, but mostly software and not culture
[16] [17]
.
On cultural goods piracy
 Music piracy vs shoplifting (difference explained by law deterrence)
[18]
.



33. Let’s take a few things into account first
6
Vignette experiments
 Hypothetical situations that the responders judge, evaluate, etc. [11]
 Very popular when analyzing controversial choices, like: violence in
patient-doctor relationship
[12]
, alcohol related sexual abuse
[13]
,
classroom cheating
[14]
, or types of theft
[15]
).
 Types of theft – Green (2012)
[15]
.
 Sometimes on piracy, but mostly software and not culture
[16] [17]
.
On cultural goods piracy
 Music piracy vs shoplifting (difference explained by law deterrence)
[18]
.
 Acquisition of a `test preparation tool’ (physicality and exclusion)
[15]
.


34. Let’s take a few things into account first
6
Vignette experiments
 Hypothetical situations that the responders judge, evaluate, etc. [11]
 Very popular when analyzing controversial choices, like: violence in
patient-doctor relationship
[12]
, alcohol related sexual abuse
[13]
,
classroom cheating
[14]
, or types of theft
[15]
).
 Types of theft – Green (2012)
[15]
.
 Sometimes on piracy, but mostly software and not culture
[16] [17]
.
On cultural goods piracy
 Music piracy vs shoplifting (difference explained by law deterrence)
[18]
.
 Acquisition of a `test preparation tool’ (physicality and exclusion)
[15]
.
 `Sharing’ (e.g. at a party) is more acceptable than downloading
[19]
.

35. 7
Let’s take a few things into account first
How are pirates different?







36. 7
Let’s take a few things into account first
How are pirates different?
Higher preference for risky behaviour
[20]






37. 7
Let’s take a few things into account first
How are pirates different?
Higher preference for risky behaviour
[20]
Less respect for the rules
[20]





38. 7
Let’s take a few things into account first
How are pirates different?
Higher preference for risky behaviour
[20]
Less respect for the rules
[20]
BUT: willingness to pirate is unrelated to willingness to
shoplifting
[21]




39. 7
Let’s take a few things into account first
How are pirates different?
Higher preference for risky behaviour
[20]
Less respect for the rules
[20]
BUT: willingness to pirate is unrelated to willingness to
shoplifting
[21]
Individual judgement is often harsher than perceived social
norms.
 Although the latter may influence the former.


40. 7
Let’s take a few things into account first
How are pirates different?
Higher preference for risky behaviour
[20]
Less respect for the rules
[20]
BUT: willingness to pirate is unrelated to willingness to
shoplifting
[21]
Individual judgement is often harsher than perceived social
norms.
 Although the latter may influence the former.
Is piracy considered an ethical problem?
[22]

41. 8
The questionnaire










42. 8
The questionnaire
 Rewards offered as an encouragement.









43. 8
The questionnaire
 Rewards offered as an encouragement.
 18 stories that were built upon the six dimensions.








44. 8
The questionnaire
 Rewards offered as an encouragement.
 18 stories that were built upon the six dimensions.
 Two studies.







45. 8
The questionnaire
 Rewards offered as an encouragement.
 18 stories that were built upon the six dimensions.
 Two studies.
Treatments:






46. 8
The questionnaire
 Rewards offered as an encouragement.
 18 stories that were built upon the six dimensions.
 Two studies.
Treatments:
 Treatment I: Ethical Judgement (EJ)





47. 8
The questionnaire
 Rewards offered as an encouragement.
 18 stories that were built upon the six dimensions.
 Two studies.
Treatments:
 Treatment I: Ethical Judgement (EJ)
 Treatment II: Social Norms (SN)




48. 8
The questionnaire
 Rewards offered as an encouragement.
 18 stories that were built upon the six dimensions.
 Two studies.
Treatments:
 Treatment I: Ethical Judgement (EJ)
 Treatment II: Social Norms (SN)
 Treatment III: Incentivized Social Norms (ISN) [23]



49. 8
The questionnaire
 Rewards offered as an encouragement.
 18 stories that were built upon the six dimensions.
 Two studies.
Treatments:
 Treatment I: Ethical Judgement (EJ)
 Treatment II: Social Norms (SN)
 Treatment III: Incentivized Social Norms (ISN) [23]
 Rating scale: 1 – Totaly unacceptable; 4 – Fully acceptable.
 Note that there is no interpretable middle.

50. 9
Story examples
 A friend of Johnny's forgot to log out from his e-mail box, after
using Johnny's computer. While closing the web browser, Johnny
spotted that the mail currently displayed on his screen contained a
one-use only access code for a payable site with TV series in High
Denition. Johnny quickly copied the code, and after returning
home used it on a season of a popular TV series.




51. 9
Story examples
 A friend of Johnny's forgot to log out from his e-mail box, after
using Johnny's computer. While closing the web browser, Johnny
spotted that the mail currently displayed on his screen contained a
one-use only access code for a payable site with TV series in High
Denition. Johnny quickly copied the code, and after returning
home used it on a season of a popular TV series.
 Not physical; Loss; Peer; No alternative; No sharing; Protection



52. 9
Story examples
 A friend of Johnny's forgot to log out from his e-mail box, after
using Johnny's computer. While closing the web browser, Johnny
spotted that the mail currently displayed on his screen contained a
one-use only access code for a payable site with TV series in High
Denition. Johnny quickly copied the code, and after returning
home used it on a season of a popular TV series.
 Not physical; Loss; Peer; No alternative; No sharing; Protection
 A new season of a popular, high budget, American TV series is
available in kiosks as an add-on for a magazine priced 7.99 PLN.
However, Johnny downloaded the series from another source, for
free.


53. 9
Story examples
 A friend of Johnny's forgot to log out from his e-mail box, after
using Johnny's computer. While closing the web browser, Johnny
spotted that the mail currently displayed on his screen contained a
one-use only access code for a payable site with TV series in High
Denition. Johnny quickly copied the code, and after returning
home used it on a season of a popular TV series.
 Not physical; Loss; Peer; No alternative; No sharing; Protection
 A new season of a popular, high budget, American TV series is
available in kiosks as an add-on for a magazine priced 7.99 PLN.
However, Johnny downloaded the series from another source, for
free.
 Not physical; No loss; Not a peer; Alternative; No sharing; No protection.

54. Sample – Study 1
10
 Students of the University of Warsaw (around 50% Economics)
 Young age (~24)
 Balanced gender (~60% female)
 N=338

55. Sample – Study 1
10
The Survey Bay[24]:
Responders’ age
 Students of the University of Warsaw (around 50% Economics)
 Young age (~24)
 Balanced gender (~60% female)
 N=338

56. 11
Sample – Study 2
Second:
Followers of Facebook profiles of organizations promoting
legal acquisition of culture (note what’s legal in Poland).
Slightly older than Study I (~28)
Mostly female (~68%)
N=129

57. 12
Methodology
To tackle the question, we estimate ordered logit regressions:
Answer = β1Dimensions + β2Controls + ε









58. 12
Methodology
To tackle the question, we estimate ordered logit regressions:
Answer = β1Dimensions + β2Controls + ε
 1) The baseline regression and robustness.
 Robust to duration of the answers and controversial questions.
 Therefore, I do not report this in this presentation.






59. 12
Methodology
To tackle the question, we estimate ordered logit regressions:
Answer = β1Dimensions + β2Controls + ε
 1) The baseline regression and robustness.
 Robust to duration of the answers and controversial questions.
 Therefore, I do not report this in this presentation.
 2) Regressions by treatment groups. Is there a difference?





60. 12
Methodology
To tackle the question, we estimate ordered logit regressions:
Answer = β1Dimensions + β2Controls + ε
 1) The baseline regression and robustness.
 Robust to duration of the answers and controversial questions.
 Therefore, I do not report this in this presentation.
 2) Regressions by treatment groups. Is there a difference?
 3) Internet-user groups. Does the judgement differ if you’re a
(non)downloader? Do the dimension coefficients?




61. 12
Methodology
To tackle the question, we estimate ordered logit regressions:
Answer = β1Dimensions + β2Controls + ε
 1) The baseline regression and robustness.
 Robust to duration of the answers and controversial questions.
 Therefore, I do not report this in this presentation.
 2) Regressions by treatment groups. Is there a difference?
 3) Internet-user groups. Does the judgement differ if you’re a
(non)downloader? Do the dimension coefficients?
 4) Regressions with interactions.
 Physical*Protection (DRM), Sharing*Peer (Promotion), Peer*Loss (Major/Minor)
 Insignificant and therefore not reported.

62. Results: The treatments
13Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01

63. Results: The groups (downloaders)
14Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01

64. Results: The groups (downloaders)
14Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01

65. Results: The groups (downloaders)
14Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01

66. Results: The groups (uploaders)
15Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01

67. Results: The groups (uploaders)
15Note: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01

68. 16
Conclusions












69. 16
Conclusions
The importance of dimensions:
 Physicality (Most important)
 Loss
 Protection
 Peer
 Sharing
 Alternative (Insignificant)





70. 16
Conclusions
The importance of dimensions:
 Physicality (Most important)
 Loss
 Protection
 Peer
 Sharing
 Alternative (Insignificant)
Individual opinion is harsher than perceived social norms.
 Incentives do not change the results (much).



71. 16
Conclusions
The importance of dimensions:
 Physicality (Most important)
 Loss
 Protection
 Peer
 Sharing
 Alternative (Insignificant)
Individual opinion is harsher than perceived social norms.
 Incentives do not change the results (much).
More frequent downloaders are possibly more conscious of
the dimensions, and are more sensitive to some of them. This
may reflect higher knowledge of the subject.


72. 16
Conclusions
The importance of dimensions:
 Physicality (Most important)
 Loss
 Protection
 Peer
 Sharing
 Alternative (Insignificant)
Individual opinion is harsher than perceived social norms.
 Incentives do not change the results (much).
More frequent downloaders are possibly more conscious of
the dimensions, and are more sensitive to some of them. This
may reflect higher knowledge of the subject.
Policies should be focused on particular aspects of piracy.

73. 17
Not fully explored data













74. 17
Not fully explored data
Gender
Age











75. 17
Not fully explored data
Gender
Age
Uploading for friends
Downloading from authorized sources
Downloading from unauthorized (with or without payment)








76. 17
Not fully explored data
Gender
Age
Uploading for friends
Downloading from authorized sources
Downloading from unauthorized (with or without payment)
(Only study 1) types of studies







77. 17
Not fully explored data
Gender
Age
Uploading for friends
Downloading from authorized sources
Downloading from unauthorized (with or without payment)
(Only study 1) types of studies
(Only study 2) information on Facebook `likes’ of:
 Unauthorized streaming services
 Authorized streaming services
 Institutions
(Only study 2) Level of education (no variation in study 1)
(Only study 2) Labour market status

78. 18
Bibliography
[1] RIAA, Frequently Asked Questions, archived version from 2011:
http://web.archive.org/web/20110123180931/http://www.riaa.com/faq.php
[2] MPAA, What is Internet Piracy?, archived version from 2010:
http://web.archive.org/web/20100327204736/http://www.mpaa.org/piracy_internet.asp
[3] Jacek Kowalski (2012), ZPAV ostro o kampanii społecznej `Prawo kultury’: To zachęcanie
do złodziejstwa, accessed on 28-03-2014 at
http://m.wyborcza.pl/wyborcza/1,105226,13112726,ZPAV_ostro_o_kampanii_spolecznej_
_Prawo_kultury__.html
[4] Larsson, S., 2011. Piracy is not theft: Problems of a nonsense metaphor. Accessed 2014-
03-04. URL https://torrentfreak.com/piracy-is-not-theft-111104/
[5] Persson, M., 2011. Minecraft creator says `no such thing as a lost sale'. Accessed 2014-
03-04. URL http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110303/02203613336/minecraft-creator-
says-no-such-thing-as-lost-sale.shtml
[6] Hart, R., 2012. Top 10 reasons people use to justify pirating digital content (and why
they're wrong). Accessed 2014-03-04. URL http://litreactor.com/columns/top-10-reasons-
people-use-to-justify-pirating-digital-content-and-why-theyre-wrong

79. 19
Bibliography - continued
[7] Wilson, M., 2013. Piracy isn't theft, but its eects are wide and far-reaching. Accessed
2014-03-04. URL http://betanews.com/2013/09/16/piracy-isnt-theft-but-its-effects-are-
wide-and-far-reaching/
[8] Tassi, P., 2012. You will never kill piracy, and piracy will never kill you. Accessed 2014-
03-04. URL http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/02/03/you-will-never-kill-piracy-
and-piracy-will-never-kill-you/2/
[9] James, G., 2013. Why piracy is never okay. Accessed 2014-03-04. URL
http://amazingstoriesmag.com/2013/02/why-piracy-is-never-okay/
[10] Goessl, L., 2007. Music piracy is downloading music ethical { no. Accessed 2014-03-04.
URL http://www.entertainmentscene360.com/index.php/music-piracy-is-downloading-
music-ethical-no-18-44608/
[11] Schoenberg, N. E., Ravdal, H., 2000. Using vignettes in awareness and attitudinal
research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 3 (1), 63{74.
[12] Steinert, T., Lepping, P., 2009. Legal provisions and practice in the management of
violent patients. a case vignette study in 16 european countries. European Psychiatry 24
(2), 135{141.

80. 20
Bibliography - continued
[13] Abbey, A., 2002. Alcohol-related sexual assault: A common problem among college
students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs (14), 118.
[14] Rettinger, D. A., Jordan, A. E., Peschiera, F., 2004. Evaluating the motivation of other
students to cheat: A vignette experiment. Research in Higher Education 45 (8), 873{890.
[15] Green, S. P., 2012. Thirteen Ways to Steal a Bicycle: Theft Law in the Information Age.
Harvard University Press.
[16] Lin, T.-C., Hsu, M. H., Kuo, F.-Y., Sun, P.-C., 1999. An intention model-based study of
software piracy. In: System Sciences, 1999. HICSS-32. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual
Hawaii International Conference on. IEEE, pp. 8{pp.
[17] Higgins, G. E., Wilson, A. L., Fell, B. D., 2005. An application of deterrence theory to
software piracy. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture 12 (3), 166{184.
[18] Wingrove, T., Korpas, A. L., Weisz, V., 2011. Why were millions of people not obeying
the law? Motivational influences on non-compliance with the law in the case of music
piracy. Psychology, crime & law 17 (3), 261{276.

81. 21
Bibliography - continued
[19] Altschuller, S., Benbunan-Fich, R., 2009. Is music downloading the new
prohibition? what students reveal through an ethical dilemma. Ethics and
Information Technology 11 (1), 49{56.
[20] Robertson, K., McNeill, L., Green, J., Roberts, C., 2012. Illegal downloading,
ethical concern, and illegal behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 108 (2), 215{227.
[21] Hill, C. W., 2007. Digital piracy: Causes, consequences, and strategic
responses. Asia Pacic Journal of Management 24 (1), 9{25.
[22] Bateman, C. R., Valentine, S., Rittenburg, T., 2013. Ethical decision making in
a peer-to-peer filesharing situation: The role of moral absolutes and social
consensus. Journal of Business Ethics 115 (2), 229{240.
[23] Krupka, E. L., Weber, R. A., 2013. Identifying social norms using coordination
games: Why does dictator game sharing vary? Journal of the European Economic
Association 11 (3), 495{524.
[24] The Survey Bay: www.thesurveybay.com; accessed on 28-03-2014.

82. Thank you for your attention!
More info: grape.uw.edu.pl/ipiracy/research-seminar
Author: Wojciech Hardy
e-mail: whardy@wne.uw.edu.pl
More about our research on:
http://grape.uw.edu.pl/ipiracy
facebook.com/ipiracy
Twitter: @GrapeUW