The analogy is imperfect sure. Copying a movie doesn't keep you from selling that movie to someone else. But the only thing that keeps you from double-speding a bitcoin is the external confirmation process. Bitcoins aren't inherently scarce--the protocol makes them that way, just like copyright makes digital works artificially scarce.
I have never claimed that anyone can steal bits. I said that people can steal bitcoins. Bitcoins are not just bits, any more than the USD in my bank account is just bits. If you take money from my bank account without my permission, I hope we can agree that you have stolen money from me. The same applies to bitcoins for precisely the same reasons.
> The analogy is imperfect sure. Copying a movie doesn't keep you from selling that movie to someone else.
But that's exactly the problem. Larceny (and theft, more generally) is traditionally defined as the taking of someone's property with the intention of depriving them of that property.
> But the only thing that keeps you from double-speding a bitcoin is the external confirmation process. Bitcoins aren't inherently scarce--the protocol makes them that way, just like copyright makes digital works artificially scarce.
I'm not sure what your point is here. Bitcoins are not inherently scarce, because they don't inherently exist. Someone had to invent and implement the Bitcoin network, obviously. We are (hopefully) agreeing on the definition of the word "bitcoin," and thus we would agree for instance that 10 years ago no bitcoins existed. You can't have a bitcoin unless the Bitcoin network exists, and thus in that sense bitcoins are inherently scarce. The same can be said of USD, or financial assets like stocks and bonds, but I would guess that we agree those can be stolen.
Anyone with a copy of the private key of a wallet can transfer all the bitcoins from that wallet to a different wallet, i.e. a wallet that only they control.