Originally Posted by HansTWN
My thoughts exactly. It is silly to turn it around and say "the creator hasn't lost anything" because the pirate would never have bought the item in question, anyway". The only angle one should look at this is "the pirate now has something that doesn't belong to him, obtained by illegal means", or "the pirate enriched himself". That is the bottom line.
Not entirely true. Some pirates would have bought. On the ones that wouldn't have bought, was the creator deprived? Can't say they were. I do agree though with you on the train of thought that you have to think of it as the pirate now has something they ordinarily wouldn't. Just with the aforementioned in mind, you can't lump it in the same as theft, which is easy using that mindset.
Also, the fence analogy doesn't work because the painter is out materials in addition to their labor. The deprivation argument kicks in there.