Here we go again. Content creators equate piracy to theft. Content consumers dismiss this on the grounds that making a copy isn't the same as theft. Both groups commit the fallacy of thinking about theft in terms of physical product. Both are wrong.
Theft has occurred, but it is the theft of use or utility as defined by the traditional models of media distribution. This is exactly like software piracy. Nothing physical has been removed, but someone is benefiting from the use of the software without compensating the creators. Media isn't any different. I fail to comprehend why this has to be explained to anyone.
It used to be content creators could dictate how their work would is consumed. They could sell their work, or choose to give it away. If they decide to sell it, they dictate the price. Consumers paid up front for the privilege of experience, and refunds aren't given because the content is 'bad'
Today, content consumers have the option of paying zero. Therefore, consumers now dictate the terms. Content consumers want to consume up front and have the option to reward the creator if they found the experience agreeable, and they set the price.
The only choice content creators have now is to share their work, or not. Once something is released, it will be consumed, despite the erection of artificial barriers to prevent such action. Compensation is now solely at the consumer's discretion. Fact.
Content consumers are the people who will be buying your product. Now, here is the part that will surprise you. They want to support creators, they want to be given that opportunity. Why? They want to feel some ownership. Don't underestimate the power of choice and free will.
Lawsuits and treating your customers as criminals is the last thing you want to do. Intentionally alienating your audience is something only misguided, habitually-litigious rock stars do.
