It&#x27;s not black and white, IMO. Say I write a screenplay that gets turned into a Hollywood blockbuster that makes 9 figures. I&#x27;d reasonably want my fair share of that money.<p>But what would I care if some 13 yo kid in a developing nation watches it on the internet? They will <i>never</i> be able to pay for this movie. There is nothing to be made from this.<p>And, you know, entertainment has value. Sure, my script could be fluff, but maybe i have a disabled kid in it, and this brings a lot of internal growth and strength to some.<p>It&#x27;s a tradeoff, and it isn&#x27;t clear what the answers are (again, IMO). Rights of the creator to control the destiny of their creation vs the rights of humanity. In the US we have decided that libraries are legal, for example. I can read and consume movies endlessly and never pay a cent, legally. Also, I can open a used book and CD store, and resell products. That hurts the economics of the publisher and producer, but is a net gain to humanity (IMO). Publishers don&#x27;t get a dime of the money from my used book store, yet it is legal because we have determined that in this case the rights of the consumer trump the rights of the publisher. A different nation, or different time, might lead to different decisions. Let&#x27;s not get too &#x27;judgey&#x27; over people that fall in a different place on that spectrum.<p>OTOH, if there is no way to get paid at all, movies in their current will essentially disappear - essentially no one is going to do a Hollywood type production as a hobby. So, conundrum.<p>Personally, I will never judge somebody that thirsts for information, can&#x27;t pay for it, and downloads it instead. There is no harm to the producer other than &quot;I want to control my creation&quot;. I recognize that desire, but I personally think there are bigger things in play here that trump that.