Some have generously acknowledged that those of us living in poorer countries, such as South Africa, would hardly have been able to afford enough computer games to make the outlay on the computer itself worth while, without sharing the games among ourselves.
It is seen as a question of Right and Wrong, but no religion is up to the task.
Before the introduction of the CD, most Hi-Fi systems could be used to dub music from LP to tape, or tape to tape.
And, if one was quick enough, one might make a tape of radio hits.
But with the introduction of the CD, perfect duplication became effortless. I am stating the obvious, but compound that crime with that of repetition: perfect duplication of another's labours was now effortless.
What of the creators? With a bit of thought we can clearly delineate them into three categories: Anarchists, Socialists, and Capitalists.
Anarchists just enjoy making music: they enjoy the feeling they get from the feeling they give.
Socialists believe in the gradual eradication of money; to them, therefore, the licence is all in all.
Capitalists, however, see music as no different to any other kind of business: money represents the labours of a man; willing seller, willing buyer, etc.
Piracy, as in privateering, falls within capitalism.
To blacken the name of privateers, is to claim that the capitalist system is perfect: for, socialists and anarchists recognize that the opportunity for piracy can only be blamed on money itself.
There is certainly an analogy to be drawn between money and data; and one with far reaching consequences: the thin client approach is the capitalist's panacea.
Piracy is a crime, but in the real world, where law itself is influenced by money, it is sometimes our duty to be a criminal.