If I really liked the Mona Lisa, I'd have three options: 1) Go see the original painting even if might cost me a pretty penny (not that it does, bare with me h

If I really liked the Mona Lisa, I'd have three options: 1) Go see the original painting even if might cost me a pretty penny (not that it does, bare with me here) 2) Buy a decent copy from a reputable artist. 3) Get a high definition scan of the painting for free and print it in high quality paper. Most people who pirate movies fall into three groups. The group that saw it in the cinema, but can't be bothered to buy a dvd/blueray to watch the movie one more time a few months/years later. The group that did not see the movie in the cinema, but wants to know if the movie is worth paying for in the form of a dvd/blueray. And finally, the group that will not buy the movie or go to the cinema anyways. The first group thinks that paying to see the Mona Lisa once is ok, but don't want to spend twice or thrice the cost of seeing the original to buy a decent copy they just want to look at once more. The second group would rather have a free taste of the artwork before committing any money into a copy that they might not like if they didn't see it before. The third group was not going to buy the copy or go see the original anyways. I think that all this will be 'amortized' at some point when digital renting and downloading of movies and tv shows become the norm and are integrated into the living room viewing experience. In any case, the excuse is either that you don't want to pay more to see something you already payed less to see once AND want to see once again, specially since now you get to see it at home, or that you want to try something out before committing to a purchase. The third groups excuse is that they would have not payed money for it anyways. I can sympathize with all three, since the options that all three require are not in the grasp of everyone yet. Regarding your final question. Yes art should be owned by the owner, said owner should not force me to pay an exorbitant price to get a copy of the artwork if I just want to watch it one more time. Also, I should not be forced to buy a copy of the art piece if I don't even know if it's worth buying. You wouldn't buy a car without test-driving it would you? Finally, some people are just not into art that much, and don't really want to own a copy of the piece. I agree with you stealing is stealing (and bad). But can you really point fingers when a lot of the stealing is caused because it really is the most sensible way to test drive or revisit the movie? Can you really point fingers if you know that your movie was watched by one more person that would have not seen it if it hadn't been pirated?