Originally Posted by MSY-MSP

The one thing that plays into the equation is the intent of the person using it.

When you look at many crimes some require intent, others do not. The term reasonable expectation is used to help define intent in some areas, and to define what naturally flows from an action. For example, I am at a shooting range, preparing to hit a clay pigeon. I shoot at the pigeon and it breaks. Just as I intended. Now one of the pieces hits the ground ricochets around and hits my buddy in the eye who is behind me. His injury occured from my intentional act. (shooting the pigeon), but his injury is not one that would be reasonably expected from the intentional action.

Carrying this forward. Lets say I broke into a house. Is this Burglary? Depends on why I am there (non-lawyers need to know that burglary is the breaking and entering of a dwelling place, at night, with the intent to commit a felony inside). If i came in the home looking for a place to get out of the rain, and then forcibly steal something from there, it is not burglary. Why because the intent wasn't there when I broke into the home to rob the homeowner. I still am guilty of robbery or theft, but not of burglary.

Carry this line of thinking over to the present thread. Theft is in essesance "the taking of the property of another with the intent to deprive that person of the permanent use or possession of the property" What does that mean? In the case of the airline seat, it is theft, because you have denied the owner (the airline) the permanent use of the seat (the duration of the flight being the life expectancy of the seat). However, in the case of the discount code it is not theft. Why? Because you are not denying them the permanant use of the item (the item being the period of the rental), you are just not paying them the full amount that you should. This is fraud and not theft. However, if the code gives an "upgrade" when whatever was reserved (be it car class or room type) is still available then I would argue that it is theft, because they lost the use of the item for the period of the rental for which you were not entitled.

Hence my analysis:
1. Sitting in F or C when not paying for it -- Theft
2. Using a discount code that you are not entitled to -- Fraud
3. Obtaining more than what you are entitled to through the use of a discount code having more features than just a discount -- Theft

It doesn't matter how you got the code or the seat. If you aren't entitled to the code/seat then you have commited a crime. The fact that the owner of the code/seat did not adequately secure the knowledge of it. Does not mittigate the act. In these cases, the only thing that will mitigate the act is if the person had a reasonable expectation that they were entitled to use the code/seat.

Now what we do here on FT in sharing discount codes is not outright fraud. Why? Because many of the discount codes are not limited to a few. I know many corporations that actually encourage the giving out of their discount codes. The main reason for this is that the more the code is used the better the deal the corp gets. At this point the person using the code has a reasonable expectation that they are entitled to use the code. (The owner gave it to me) And now it rests on the supplier of the service to enforce the rules of the code to protect their revenue. This is a significant tightrope to walk.

I may have more thoughts, but that is it for now.