I believe the point is moot. Piracy exists on a large scale. DRM did not stop it. Lawsuits have not stopped it. Not making the product available in digital form has not stopped it. Appeal to moral standards works only at a low level, and cannot work at all when there is not a legal alternative. To argue otherwise is to ignore measured reality.
Nor is this piracy centralized. You can't just go after a few kingpins and organisations and shut it down. The mass populace are doing it individually. This implies that the mass populace are now and will continue to vote with their wallets (over the short term) and ignore the long term consequences.
(And putting all your potential customers in jail certainly won't cause an increase in sales.)
<shrug>
As I pointed out earlier, this is an effect of technological change. The only way to get rid of it is to get rid of the technology. And that's <not> going to happen. I.P. producers effectively have two choices -
1. The 100% of 0 method, i.e. don't put it on the market legally, and get no revenue. People who want to will get it illegally anyway.
Or 2. Take a few percent of a large pie, and get a small amount of revenue, acknowledging that most of the people aren't going to pay. This is how all publishing businesses worked pre-copyright.
This comment is not about legal realities, or moral concepts. I'm just measuring the world as it is.
DRM is based on the assumption that there is another way. It is useless in the #1 (no product), and an unwanted annoyance in #2 (which will cause people to not buy the legal product to get away from the DRM, shrinking the few percent even smaller.) The only products where the DRM has held up have been product that failed in the marketplace. (and arguments can be made that the sucessful DRM is <why> the products failed in the first place). Otherwise, the illegal world cracks it and and passes around the cracking software. And you end up back at #2. (Who sells more DRM books .lit or .prx?).