The word stealing is used as a euphemism here, Hortland. It's a shorter, more salient word than 'copyright infringement', and being such, commands the attention of those most prone to such an act--teens.
On a practical level, however, I see little difference. Either way, you are robbing somebody of their due royalties. You aren't taking money out of their pocket, but, having taken their product for your own enjoyment, you are failing to put it into that pocket. Call it copyright infringement, call it breach of implied contract. It is something, no matter how you slice it. As a onetime aspiring novelist, I think that it should be the artist's choice how his or her material is spread. If payment is what the creator wants, for risk of less publicity, then payment is what he should get.
The biggest, most important difference to consider is that while stealing simply deprives a person of something, copyright infringement does give them some consideration for their work. An unlicensed user is still a user, and as such, has given that media yet another consumer. Even without the royalties, the media grows and expands its effect on society by touching another mind--which is what art was once ALL about, at least in the fairy tales... Reality is a bit more complex.
