If I copy your property, you still have access to, and use of, your property.

I would argue that is not immoral.

As a (recreational part-time), content creator myself, I would of course prefer it if people paid me so I didn’t have to work every day. But I’d rather that be on the basis of somebody wanting me to thrive, and showing their support, rather than me threatening them with legal action because they can’t prioritise giving me money over other demands in their life.

If you want a physical copy of some work, you need to pay for it. That’s moral. Digital copies? I think we’ve bought the myths of publishers and the content industry and it’s harming our education as a species.

However, I consider the privatisation of publically funded research to be (currently) legal theft.

Edit: I realise this was an indirect response to your comment, so I would also like to add that a meta-point I want to make is that we came to almost polar opposite conclusions despite having the same "morality" to a certain accuracy. Therefore, it could be argued that morality is not a sufficient measure for lawmaking.

FWIW my work, which puts food on my table, is pirated every day.