The myth of 'Civil Disobedience is all about getting caught' is spread by those who don't like the goals of today's civil disobedience, only those of yesterday.
Please, don't make the English language less flexible.
Those who break laws publicly in order to point out the unjustness are practicing civil disobedience.
Those who break laws secretly in order to point out the unjustness, while hoping not to get caught, are practicing vigilantism.
Those who break laws secretly, while hoping not to get caught, are merely law-breakers.
None of those positions are inherently good or bad. If this were about copyright infringement, the civil disobedience group would be the people who admit they pirated stuff, but fight the charges anyway. The vigilante group would be those who go out of their way to pirate, oh, Disney films, and spread them far and wide anonymously. The law-breaker group would range from people singing "Happy Birthday" at public events to those making millions by pirating new movies and selling cheap copies.
Calling a vigilante someone who is practicing civil disobedience reduces the flexibility of the language in an attempt to drape the moral high ground of civil disobedience around the shoulders of the greyer vigilantism.