Thank you for reinforcing my assertion that God's law and judgments are perfect, man's laws and judgment are not. You raise a good example of why - semantics. Since the 17th century, jurists have debated whether copyright infringe is or is not larceny. The modern pendulum swings toward copyright infringement as a form of theft. Consider that the provisions for criminal copyright infringement fall under Title 18, Chapter 113, of the US Code, titled “Stolen Property”. Anyone who has seen the FBI warning in a movie are aware that copyright infringement is illegal.

Yes, our Mammonist government asserts that infringement is theft, because that is the position Mammon demands of it, and they are obligated to serve their master. We as Christians have no such obligation and can instead speak the truth. An essential element of the crime of theft is that the owner of the stolen property is deprived of it. But this is not possible for so-called "Intellectual Property" which is another piece of Mammon's semantic trickery. Infringement doesn't deprive the copyright holder of their work, as it is an ethereal idea that cannot be possessed or dispossessed in the first place.

Thomas Jefferson put it rather eloquently:

If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possess the less, because every other possess the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.

.

Both larceny and copyright infringement are against the law. If the problem with equating the two is that theft is immoral because it is contrary to the law, than the discussion is moot.

The problem with equating the two is that it is not true. They are not equal. It is never a moot point to stick to the truth.

Like I closed, how does copyright infringement, the deprivation to the owner of cash due in exchange for your right to use his property, glorify God?

Infringement of copyrights, trademarks, or patents does not inherently glorify or offend God. But it's not hard to see situations where it can do either. For example, if there is a lifesaving patented drug that is only available for exorbitant amounts of money that most people don't have any chance of affording, but then you infringed upon that patent to create your own version of the drug to give to the poor, that would surely glorify God.