The supreme court is fairly clear on the point of copyright infringement vs. theft. This point is lost on the layperson, but nevertheless remains important. > Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple “goods, wares, [or] merchandise,” interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright, nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/473/207/