The Hollywood Cartel strikes again.
You have to look at this from a few views though,
First the for protection:
I can understand that people deserve to be paid for writing a script, or for a person writing a song.
I understand that these people, these artist do want to try and protect their work from being produced by another for two reasons:
1: To stop people plagurising
2: To make money out of it.
Copyright theft is suppose to cost Billions of currency (which ever denomination) through the loss of sales because of the black market.
Of course this leads onto the opposition:
If it wasn't for the consumer there would be no money to be lost
It's understandible that we live in a world that seems to be targetted to create "Consumerism", and if your spending money on everything, eventually you run out of funds.
So what does this leave??? Nothing, you either own something or you don't, or you bend the law a little just to survive.
I can understand someone making a copy of a game, a film or a song, I don't really have much problem with that, as thats an individual doing it alone. In fact if you were to look at the patenting laws you can even assemble a patented device at home as long as your not going to mass market it, and it's a single prototype. (of course you might have to ask for permission also)
To put it bluntly, I can't afford to purchase everything necessary in life, sometimes I'm left to starve a day or two just to make ends meet, this is down to consumerism. So if I copy a game, film or music track, I have good reason.
If it's really worth purchasing I will, but I'm not paying £4000 for a piece of software, which is just an upgraded version of something that had previously been £3500, where the cost of a copy would be like £1.50. If they charged £25-£40 I would agree with it.