To what extent does piracy provide gratis customer retention, price discrimination, and marketing services for IP industries, thus undermining competition from the commons? (Recall the WIFO global theory of change: commons ⇄ freedom, equality, security ⇄ good future.)
How to delimit cases in which piracy only substitutes for paying IP holders or for not accessing and preserving otherwise unavailable material, and does not substitute for free/libre/open material – in other words, what cases might be ethical, given WIFO theory of change?
Is there some way to exploit pirates’ and IP industries’ disagreement on facts – whether piracy hurts industry or not – to get the attention of both camps?
One idea is a campaign claiming the openness is rehab for pirates. Discuss.