Ok, but I think the point being made is that the artists (ignore the record companies, they're idiots) feel as if they are being stolen from.
Not just in monetary cost.
So; ethical theft?
Not just in monetary cost.
So; ethical theft?
Authors often get advances against royalties. Let's say BigPublishingCo pays you $10,000 to write a book. Let's say your book doesn't do well. What are the odds you'll get to write a second book? As an author, you're looking at your future and trying to figure out how you can increase sales.
One way to do that is to make the pirate copies disappear.
That's what publishers try to do, so they can stay in business.
Let me know if you see any issues with this arrangement.
Typically, by the time a band has "recouped" its advance and has only began to start earning for the artists and has theoretically broken even according to the bizarre accounting of the studios in actuality it has resulted in a return on investment to the studios of several hundred percent.
Book publishing is similar but generally not quite so evil.
The basis for IP law is to encourage the production of creative works. The moral imperative is to allow science and art to improve people's lives. IP law should be a practical set of rules to create a free market for these works.
Does the current system do this? Not very well. Neither does infringement in most cases.
The idiots are still laughing all the way to the bank.
> So; ethical theft?
No, copyright infringement.