These are arguments I've already heard, and which I consider hackneyed. One problem with dismissing the argument that downloaders would not have been purchaser

These are arguments I've already heard, and which I consider hackneyed. One problem with dismissing the argument that downloaders would not have been purchasers is that a download count doesn't accurately reflect usage of the item. Producers cry in horror that their "content" was downloaded 100,000 times, but each user may have inadvertently been double or triple counted based on multiple computers, failed saves, forgotten file locations, or mistaken download methods (eg, view image versus save to disk). On top of this, hoarding behavior causes people to collect things for which the perceived value (something) is greater than the cost (free / time to download). Hoarders will likely never use the item, but will show up as a download (or two or three) anyway. Lastly, I doubt this to be the case in this situation, but artificially increasing a download count for the purpose of inflating possible damages is blindingly simple. In short, I agree with your addendum, that anything which can be copied will be copied, and copies have nothing to do with sales unless you collect money at the point of copy. The more time spent complaining about loss, the less of a business and more of a funded hobby you are (and wouldn't we all like to have funded hobbies).