Ahem, claiming someone misunderstands a definition doesn’t make it so.

Of course not. It was you ignoring parts of a definition that undermined your argument while misinterpreting the remainder as I’ve shown you that make it so.
I always showed you where you failed to understand what you’ve just read.

“Object” can clearly be used about both tangible and intangible things. It’s not about confusing levels of abstraction (@ jc) or making up defintions.

It is misunderstanding.
An object is always related to something tangible by definition.
Failure to accept such a thing is indeed an attempt of yours to redefine concepts to match your flawed argument. That won’t pass.
You can call other things object if you want (like objects of thought) but that doesn’t make them objects per see as those don’t match the actual definition of what an object is that is globally accepted.

The question becomes if “object” as used in the defintion of theft should be limited to only tangible objects.

That’s not even a question to begin with if you use the actual definition of object.
Again your misunderstandings only bring more problems where there are none.

In that case it can be argued that the definition of “theft” hasn’t kept up with the digital age.

If the definition of theft didn’t change despite we being at the digital age for so long, then it’s safe to assume that it won’t change any time soon and that it hasn’t changed intentionally.
Definitions change on a constant basis and yet this hasn’t yet happened for theft despite being such a crucial issue, so it cannot be argued that the definition is outdated at all.

If you have access to the computer of someone who is lazy about backing up his files and you copy all their files onto a hard drive you own and then thoroughly erase his hard drive.
What’s happened there?

Invasion of privacy and intrusion because you accessed and used property that wasn’t yours to begin with.
Then destruction of private property when you decided to erase the files that weren’t your property.

Just because the end result of two separate acts is the same as one other it doesn’t make it at all the same thing.

Intuitively, the word I’d use would be theft, despite that nothing tangible has been taken.

Your intuition is flawed. Which is typical of you.
No theft happened.

Even if you don’t erase the hard drive, and he still has the files, theft seems like an appropriate expression.

It isn’t, yet again.
Only when you try to redefine what theft is would it sound appropriate.
There wasn’t a shift in property involved, just duplication or duplication and destruction in your previous example.

The moment you stop redefining things all of your assumptions fall dead on track.

We already debated money.

You can leave money aside. That has yet to be debated.
I’m waiting for you to finally admit your complete misconceptions regarding information so I don’t have to explain you of the basic in two separate topics when it’s already incredibly hard for you to learn one thing by itself.

If you hack someone’s account and transfer all their money, nothing tangible has been transfered anywhere.

Just because I don’t want you spreading misconceptions around here I’ll just clarify you on this one since I’ve already explained to you how this works several times before despite your failure to understand it.
When you hack someone’s account you’re changing the record of how much cash someone owns.
It would be no different than going to a piece of paper with a table of how much every one owned and erasing that record.
That’s all you’re doing, changing a record of how much cash one person has the right to.

This is called tampering information. It’s a totally different crime, not even considered theft.
Stop confusing money with account’s records once and for all please.

Same goes with bitcoin, a currency that doesn’t even have physical representation. When someone has their bitcoin wallet hacked they use the expression “my bitcoins have been stolen”. Nothing tangible has been removed.

An expression can be misleading or used to convey comparable but different acts. That’s not a valid argument.
People can say “Stop fucking with my head” and there is no one engaging in sexual acts with the head of that person.
Or is your world-view so limited you take all expressions literally with no further interpretation?

Even in the context of mmorpgs people use the word “theft” about the situation where their account gets hacked and items taken.

Same thing applies here.
It’s an act comparable to theft on something that is used as a simulation of reality. It in no way constitutes theft. It’s actually invasion of privacy and tampering of information coupled with unauthorised access.
The end result is similar to theft from the game’s point of view and, like the typical pro-copyright does regarding file-sharing, claiming it is theft adds a darker connotation and has the practicality of being one word instead of a few of them.

The definition of theft did not change regardless of all these cases who have existed for more than a decade because those cases aren’t actually theft.

If people have no problem using the word “theft” about the removal of intangible digital property, then it seems to indicate that tangibility isn’t that relevant in the context.

Tangibility is the core issue regarding theft.
I just don’t have a problem using practical expressions because I can tell them apart from the correct use of the word and I recognise the practicality of using a short word instead of a larger expression.
The problem comes when people like you fail to understand the actual difference between one use and the other.

In the context of piracy the “theft” is slightly different. It consists of not paying for somthing. Otoh that’s how you define “stealing” in the context of shoplifitng.

The context of theft in piracy is wrong since it yet doesn’t involve loss or property.
Not paying for something is not theft. Theft by definition involves loss of property without due payment. Which is what happens in shoplifting.
Loss of property by itself isn’t theft. Not paying for something isn’t theft either. It’s when both happen that you’re in a situation of theft.

It would be nice if you first had the concepts right before applying them onto something else, you’d avoid making claims under false assumptions all the time.

With piracy you’re not taking something from the iTunes store, but you’re still taking something that’s owned by someone other than the person you’re getting it from.

Rather contradictory don’t you think?
I’m not taking something but I’m still taking something? I guess you’re too confused trying to justify a flawed argument from the get go.

Nothing is taken with piracy, unless you’re talking about high-seas piracy, which I seriously hope haven’t gotten that confused.
I’m copying what someone else owns. That’s a completely different thing.
Even going by your MMO example, there’s a huge difference between duping items and hacking an account.

Perhaps the most accurate description of the situation is that the person uploading is doing the stealing and the person downloading is receiving stolen goods.

Still not accurate at all.
Just a flawed beyond repair statement since there’s no loss of property involved on either of the sides.

Additionally, he could have potentially actually downloaded the same movie multiple times. If I get caught stealing a DVD from Wal-Mart, then try to come back a month later to steal another, I won’t be able to say “Oh, I already paid the fine for stealing it last time…”, Wal-Mart is going to count it as a separate offense & I’ll have to pay another fine or spend time in jail or whatever….