>>13137244There is nothing immoral about piracy. If some product simply is not worth its current price point for some individual, said product will not be bought by said individual. So if an individual decides to pirate software, there is no difference in revenue for its provider. The only difference is that pirates may spread their opinion of the product, resulting in more sales (better for the company than never having the software been used) or less sales (protecting consumers if their opinion is justified).
Example: Say I pirate books, read a couple of chapters and if its contents appeal (and are worth its price) to me, I buy a physical copy. If you object to piracy in this scenario, you basically expect people to be disappointed by the products they buy. This is horrible both for consumers, as well as vendors. If the book were shit, I would simply stop reading. I wouldn't have the financial loss to inform later decisions. Even if I didn't buy the book, there would be no loss for the publisher.
The only reason for piracy to be immoral is if the pirate would have bought the product if they hadn't found a way to pirate it. This doesn't necessarily mean the product is worth its price point. The consumer may be forced to pay for the software because of their employer. Since many programs are the de facto industry standard (Adobe, Autodesk, etc.), especially since patents of software functionality are a thing, consumers may be required to pay for overpriced software regardless of what employer they work for. The industry standard also isn't necessarily the best program. Maya for instance is such a shit show that FOSS blender is now backed by companies such as Ubisoft.
