I'm only arguing against the blanket statement that there is no such thing as victimless tort.<p>As for the distribution issue, unless there are actual damages I still don't think the copyright owner is a victim.<p>That's like saying that you are a victim if someone walks across your property without permission. They may not be legally able to do that (in the US), but if the act does not affect you in any way, you can not justifiably claim to be a victim.