The problem that I was trying to tackle is this one:
1. media companies realize that people are able to get their content without having to buy it from them (e.g., by illegal download);
2. to protect their revenues, companies are trying to pass the new concept that you don't pay to OWN THE MEDIA; you pay to PLAY THE CONTENT. They need this new concept, because they are not selling physical media anymore, and (with DRM) you don't even own the files you downloaded because you can't do what you want with them.
This new concept allows media companies to claim that if you play their content and didn't pay for them, you're a thief and should be treated as such.
3. media companies refuse to acknowledge the other consequence of their new concept. Today, the playing of content is the ONLY thing that you actually purchase when you pay for a download. You haven't paid for the possession of something physical; and you haven't paid for the possession of your files, because you are not allowed to give to someone else, or resell them.
So the consequence I am talking of is: if you never, nor will ever, play the content that you have paid for, you have literally paid for *nothing*. So the media company that you paid should give you the possibility of a refund/substitution: otherwise, according to their own terms, when the company says that it actually sold you something, it's lying.