No offense, but I see a flawed theory at work here. The idea is that if someone can't get an album or a piece of software for free, he'll be forced to pay for it, right?
Hate to tell you, but (I can't believe this hasn't occurred to such intelligent people like yourselves!) it doesn't work out that way in the real world. Sure,
some pirates, no doubt, do it for kicks; but I think the vast majority do it because
they honestly can't afford to buy the thing they want. Case in point, I spent the last 24 hours eating nothing but buttered toast. I get paid today, and boy my stomach and taste buds can't wait! And every penny I get will barely keep me fed until the next paycheck. I have no room in my budget for the latest Nicki Minaj CD. (Not that I listen to crap like that -- just to be clear. I just needed an example.)
I feel that members of a group should look out for each other. We geeks ("hackers" in the original sense of the word) -- or techies, or whatever term you like to use -- are a subculture. We face problems no one else understands; we have only each other to turn to for support. So, if the choice is between a $30 worth of eggs and bread to survive for another week, or paying $30 for the thing that lets you keep on geekin'... well, I think it's pretty cold-hearted to slam someone (or worse, turn the 900-lb. gorilla of our corrupt legal sytem loose on him) for doing the hacker thing and
finding a solution to the problem.
The fact is, we live in a world where
MOST people live in poverty, of varying degrees. For some people, if they had to pay for luxuries like, let's say, recorded music, they'd never have any to listen to.
Also, I'd suggest reading the essay
Against Intellectual Property by Stephen Kinsella. It's very short but extremely thought-provoking. After considering the logic presented in it, I gave up on the idea of intellectual property altogether. And I'm an
artist by nature! See the7thsphere.deviantart.com if you doubt that. (Anybody want to buy a portrait?!?)
For the people who
can't afford intellectual property, no amount of prohibition is going to get them into the checkout line. No amount of prohibition
can get them into the checkout line -- it's impossible to spend what you don't have. You see what I'm sayin'? And litigating against them is even
less useful! With lawsuits and/or a criminal charge on their records, they're less employable, hence less able to acquire the money you want them to pay you in the first place! Talk about a vicious circle!