I'm not sure why people come out with these moral axioms whenever piracy comes up. It's not a moral axiom; it's an expression of preference. More seriously, a

I'm not sure why people come out with these moral axioms whenever piracy comes up. It's not a moral axiom; it's an expression of preference. More seriously, any argument for or against it relies on so much shared understanding that it's not clear that there's much use arguing about it at a length of two or three sentences. One sentence is enough to express the conclusion, but a rigorous argument that covered all the major approaches would require a fairly hefty book. Because printing, pressing & such are (were) possible to regulate with laws. Humming is not. That's one approach, but how will you defend your right to hum whatever you want when all of your actions are recorded all the time? Our current technological progress appears to be headed that way, making automatic enforcement of any arbitrary rules possible. In that situation, the question of what the rules should be is more than a question of what sort of rules can be enforced.