The biggest problem is treating integrity and LEGALITY as just another commodity to trade. That may be practical reality but the argument will never win the hearts and minds of industry or legislators. The latter in particular respond poorly to being told, "you must provide incentive to obey laws." They did: It is called "prison."

Even that assumes legality as commodity IS even practically reality, far from given. It is like the old anecdote about a woman admitting she would have sex for a million dollars then idignantly demanding, "what do you think I am?!" when asked if she would do it for one: We already know what they are; now we are just haggling.

So, yeah, Big Media behave like greedy SOBs, because they are. Stealing from anyone, including greedy SOBs, remains unjustified and illegal. If Charles Manson steals a song from the Beatles it might be justifiable to steal it back; stealing it just because one desires it, but not enough to pay, is clearly wrong.

Obviously, Big Media would reduce the motive for piracy if they made it cheaper, faster and easier to obtain their products (and I would argue $T is just a special case of $P.) They would probably therefore reduce the incidence of piracy, too, though to a lesser extent. They should clearly do so, not only for that reason, but to improve their sales and public image.

That should not be a condition of reducing piracy, one that lets pirates completely off the hook. That is simple extortion, also illegal, and for very good reason. If I left my door unlocked and someone stole my TV, the cop who came out to take a report would probably (and rightly) call me an idiot, but the police would investigate that theft no less (or more) dutifully than they do any other stolen TV. If other TV viewers joined TV thieves in complaining, they would (rightly) be ignored.

Stop making me defend the property rights of greedy multinational SOBs: It feels dirty. That I do it anyway ought to tell you something.