Here's a table I adapted from Louis Rossman's video on the levels of piracy, grey areas and his morals and ethics on it. (spreadsheet file)
I tried to condense each rank and make it less about a specific type of media like CD audio or DVD video, along with a table of simplified characteristics of each situation. Of course more levels can be added and there are many situations not covered. This hierarchy is simply the way Louis ordered it from more to less justifiable; he respects people can think about it differently and I do too. He suggests that he doesn't really care about people that pirate without giving a shit about creators, and that he only has a problem with people who aren't honest with themselves about their motivations.
Setting legality aside, what 'level of piracy' is morally or ethically acceptable to you?
It's important to be cognizant of various worldwide perspectives, considering the part of your comment on political discourse.
Some countries don't care that everyone pirates everything and anything.
Others, like Japan for example, have copyright ingrained both in the laws and in the culture. Some think "right clicking and saving an image on a public website" is theft. It's part of the reason Sony and Nintendo are so anal about copyright and how there are no Manga sharing sites located in Japan.
So not only the laws different everywhere what is legitimate discourse changes too.
You were not asking about what is legally acceptable. Using laws to determine what is normal is the same logic as enlightened centrism. Th Overton Window is not defines legitimacy or morality.
Looking at the gamut of possible positions, private property is on the right. As it is currently practiced, including intellectual property, it is on the extreme right.
Discourse normalizing this extreme-right state does not serve the common person. It serves the corporate and private capital interests exclusively by increasing inequality and socioeconomic stratification. This is immoral, which is what you asked about. It is also frequently illegitimate because destroys democracies in favor of capture by special interests, and it is supported through deceptive tactics that keep populations under control.
You mention Japan, where neoliberal private property laws are more mature than most countries. That's a great example. Their political system is broken more than most, and that's how we get such extreme ideologies put into practice. Many Japanese citizens recognize the illegitimacy of their democracy, and as such voting and organizing rates are extremely low. For many citizens, the greatest political progress they've seen in decades was Abe's assassination. That's exactly what you get when you delegitimize your government through extreme positions pushed by special interests.
Yes the LibDems there are right wing neo-liberals but it's not just corporations driving it. Insofar as I've talked to actual people in Japan whom I know personally and consumed Japanese media this is the basis of how I know what the overall politic is like. A lot of apathy, care about tax cuts above all else, and nationalism.
Eh, plenty of Japanese people are very anti-nationalist. The rich and powerful are nationalist, though, and that's why the conservative Buddhists have held a mandate for decades. Corporate Japan does support these parties by a vast majority, and that is also the group with the most exposure to foreigners.
The anarchists were strong in Japan until they were finally crushed in WWII, and leftism was never allowed to reorganize afterward, which is strongly tied to the manifestation of Japanese counter-culture and disenfranchisement. People with these beliefs still exist widely - they simply have no power or money. Nonetheless they are present enough that they manage to support many left-wing artists, in the fringe and also sometimes in the mainstream. For example Miyazaki is still beloved for Nausicaa, despite him being considered an anti-Japanese traitor by the right. Left-wing media gets more and more flooded out by neoliberal swill as it gains international appeal, unfortunately, and overt leftist themes have become rare since the 90s.
The US did not end the empire when Japan was defeated in WWII. Instead, they used their control over the family so they could be used to keep the population obedient under occupation. Then, fearing leftists in the Cold War, they found that this pre-established political power was closest to their interests and ideals. They kept the current strong in doing so. Even so anti-empire sentiment was strong among the powerless masses for some time after their defeat. But it had no real basis or power because the old powers (and their amassed private property) remained, and now the families attached to the defeated empire are once again ruling with a near-mandate. Unsurprisingly, this occurred after the corporate class grew inequally powerful during the economic miracle. In other words, their government is extreme compared to the ideology of a large number of its population. But that population is largely distinct from the group with the most exposure to the Anglosphere, and largely distinct from the groups greenlighting mass media projects from around 2000 onward.
I get ya, American anti-communism indoctrination is involved. Thanks for the treatise. Back to the topic at hand.
One big difference in Japan vs. North America/Europe is that second hand music, videos and video games are waaaaaaay easier to find at reasonable non-scalper prices.
Yeah, there's a cultural difference regarding the value/desirability of used things. Including cars, and houses although those depreciate for additional reasons.