There is no moral argument for piracy.

Telling me I can't read, or watch, or say things is infringing on my human rights. Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

Counter: but your reading something I wrote without paying me infringes on my rights to information I produce.

Reply: You have no "rights" over information, any more than you have rights to the CO2 you exhale, or the river that runs through your land.

Producing useful information is invaluable to society. I'm not diminishing that. But it's not something you can practically own, any more than you can own the water cycle, or an emotion, or the right to look at the Moon.

My primary argument is more practical than moral. One cannot own information. You can own a book, and take it with you, and hide it away in a box. But you can only 'own' a thought until you speak it. Once spoken, or written, it is no longer physically possible to maintain ownership. Greedy people have been trying very hard for the last 50 years or so. They're failing. They're like the feudal lords of Europe, proclaiming inevitable Divine Right even as the middle class is rising.

I'm pragmatic. These people would have you believe I'm an idealistic Commie, and they're the realists. I contend they're the idealists.

I work with software. My career is manipulating information. I'm telling you, it can't be stopped. It's like trying to own atmosphere. Three hundred years ago, people decided they could 'own' information. Fifty years ago, technology made sharing information trivial, and people decided they could stop it with more technology. I think they're crazy.

Just ask Beyoncé.

On the moral side, information, numbers, and algorithms belong to humanity. Just like breathing and watching sunsets. It is a draconian, tyrannical government which infringes on that right and uses force against individuals for learning, teaching, and inventing.