Yes, but most software costs quite a bit more than music. What are the odds of buying something you already have an illegal copy of when the item costs $60, as opposed to $1?

On the contrary, a lot of poor schmucks were railroaded to jail or worse simply because the jury was prejudiced. Need I mention how many black americans ended up wrongly sentenced because they were black, back in the inglorious days?

A layman does not understand the practicalities and nuances of law. He or she is not trained to be an objective thinker, and are thus susceptible to a whole range of manipulations, the fact often exploited by legal teams on both sides. Often, a juror does not perceive his duty as seriously as one might hope. Also, the average person is susceptible to peer pressure and can vote not based on their own view of the proceedings, but based on the view of the majority.

As for the legalities of law being "explained" to them - unless they take a few years of law school to get those legalities right, I sort of doubt they suddenly get competent in that field based on a ten minute speech.

All this and more would be enough to automatically claim bias with any jury and its dismissal.

The best alternative, while also not perfect, is the panel of judges. These are professionals, who know the intricacies of law and cannot be swayed or hoodwinked into passing judgements based on their own preconceptions of the person standing trial or the case being processed. The chance of a judge falling into the same pit as a common layman are slim - that's why they're appointed as judges.

Literature and word of mouth. Being such an honest person that I am, I have had no experience with any justice system, as it were, from the inside.

I did not say that the panel of judges is infallible. I simply state that a group of professionals, educated in the relevant field beyond the level of a common lawyer and certainly beyond the level of an average person, is better suited to pass judgements than a group of laymen who come from all strata of society and are certainly not individually fit to take part in the most important decision making process of a trial in most cases.

Just the fact that they need someone else to explain the interpretation of the law to them, instead of being capable of doing that by themselves is proof of that. You don't let a group of randomly selected civilians do the decision making processes when building an aeroplane or a nuclear power plant, why should you let that same group decide someone's fate, sometimes terminally?

A lot of people who are taking stances against TPB seem oblivious to the fact that the founders of TPB lost a big profile case in swedish courts recently. What is unfortunate is that under the guise of fighting piracy a lot of civil liberties on the Internet are being diminiched and private companies / copyright holders have lately been given the right to demand that ISP:s hand over IP:s to them. This has all been made possible by our right wing coalition government. The same goes with the state's right to store digital information, largely under the guise of 'fighting international terrorism'. So while I would like to say that I am proud to live in a country that has relaxed implementation of copyright laws, things are more or less moving in the wrong direction. But the biggest problem is not that there has been a larger focus of anti-piracy as of late, the problem is that Sweden gives private corporate interests the explicit right to treat the juridicial system as play-doe.

Yep same in my country. And while pretty much every group of people under the age of 30 is wondering and asking why, the government doesn't seem to give a crap and even give those private groups more and more rights.

No, DRM is an attempt to control how Legal purchasers of software end up using it.  Pirates don't have to deal with the DRM only paying customers do.

Stardock's sites are American based....so I just go with the flow...

Give up on dictionary interpretations....there are many cultures where the simple taking of their photograph is considered theft of their soul.

That's because governments believe private corporations fuel their economies....hence the sucking up, bending rules to keep CEO's happy.  What's more, many politicians are 'successful businessmen/women in their own right... politics is the second string to their bow which allows them to influence government decisions/official economic trends.  And in some/many cases it is a second income stream... because being already stinking rich isn't enough.  Greed is why the World is in such a mess... because it is rife in politics as well as business.

Truth is, though, consumers (the buying public) fuel economies.  Without them, corporations have no income stream/revenue, yet government never... well rarely goes in to bat for the consumer when greedy companies are gouging far too much. Government by the people for the people  yeah, right.... only if you're corporate people or fabulously wealthy... otherwise it's "piss off".

That's closer to the truth than any other explanation proffered here.  I purchased a download of a Porcupine Tree album from a previously reputable/trusted provider and can not use it because of DRM.  To play my music they said I must purchase a compatible media player (something I'd not encountered with them before) that would have cost me upwards of $45 AUD.  Well they can get stuffed... permanently (another lost customer because of DRM).   I'll forego my 11 bucks (been told it's non-refundable) and go get the album from a 'real world' music store on DRM-free disc for $19.95.

I also own a legally purchased Joss Stone CD that I can't easily play on my PC through my media players... and being I've not owned a hi-fi system since mine died a year ago, it's a pain in the arse when I want to hear it.  In order to hear it on my PC I have to jump through hoops... go through some DRM/licensing rigmarol that takes an eternity because it has to go online and connect to some DRM management site... and I have a fast internet connection (I.5mbs) so it's not on my end.  Most times it freezes solid part way through and I just give up. Now my earlier (successful) attempts should have been recorded to avoid this ongoing pain inconvenience, but no, the bastards make me jump though hoops every time I want to hear it.

So if enetertainment/software/gaming coproprations want to know why piracy exists, this it it... forcing inconvenience, unfair usage restrictions  and excessive pricing on paying customers.  It would be more tolerable... well slightly, if the rights, income and financial futures of the artists/creators, those who did the real work were protected, but they're not... not to the degree the industry giants claim... not in a corporate world that sees artists/creators get a pittance of overall profit while the corporate execs are rolling in dough, living in the lap of luxury.

Now if theft is the issue here, which it would seem it is, then corporate theft should also be discussed to make it a balanced argument.  It's all well and good to condemn piracy, but until we the people accept and address the primary reason for piracy and rising crime, the primary cause, corporate manipulation and greed, will continue to feed it. So yeah, to me, it's rather hypocritical that piracy is condemned while corporate theft almost gets the thumbs up in the absence of appropriate and well deserved condemnation. 

We are all victims of corporate greed/theft - through excessive pricing; poor quality due to corner/cost cutting; DRM/digital maniuplation; excessive executive salaries and excesses; low wages that are a pittance in todays corporately engineered economy... and the list goes on - so why am I one of a very small minority who sees piracy as just one of the symptoms of a much larger issue?

Yes, lets do the easiest way and play the "idiot customer" role. After all, it is the right of large corporations to ram spiky things into rear orifices of common people. Why should that right be questioned! They're corporations. They're always right.

Well yeah, we can do that, only it won't make piracy go away in the slightest, and it certainly isn't going to change the way the market works. I have to stress once again, I am all for people protecting their work, but this needs to be done in a proactive way. Imposing restrictive DRM schemes simply doesn't work - you only hurt the paying customer who is then more likely to download illegal copies in the future than if he got a hassle-free product. While at the same time, and here's the real kicker, pirates go through that "protection" like a hot knife through butter.

So what's the solution. Doing nothing is always the easy answer, but as we all know, doing nothing changes nothing. I think the ball is with the corporations now. They can continue to do the Darth Vader routine and choke the life out of loyal customers while the "rebels" go scot free - or they can change their attitude towards the overall situation.

Again:

1. Lower the prices; current prices create an extremely competitive market where the average customer can afford only one or two titles a month (keep in mind the majority of gamers do not have steady and affluent incomes). Lowering prices will not only expose a title to a wider audience, it would also allow individual customers to purchase more titles in a given period of time, instead of maybe purchasing one and then pirating the next two or three due to lack of money.

2. Reduce budgets; bloated budgets are probably the number two reason why prices are so high (corporate greed being number one as usual). Game production budgets are starting to resemble and in some cases outmatch budgets usually seen only in the context of big, flashy Hollywood films, while at the expense of actual content and gameplay. We are seeing exorbitant ammounts of effort being poured into visuals, movie star voiceovers etc. while there seems to be a trend to reduce gameplay hours, actual playable content etc.

Now, if you look at the recent indie games released or in development, you will see that such vast amounts of money are not mandatory if you want to make a good game that sells. Gamers first and foremost want good gameplay, not a pissing contest in who can cram more polygons into a scene. We need games, not tech demos.

3. Quality customer support. Need I explain this? A well treated customer is a happy customer, and happy customers are better at advertising than any commercial.

4. Quality community relations. As I said before, keeping in touch with your potential buyers is vital. People who feel a sense of camaraderie with the people who make the actual game are far less likely to just download a free copy off the net. That is much easier to do when dealing with faceless corporate behemoths.

The above is how you fight piracy. Or you can continue to scream like a little girl/shut your eyes/invoke the wrath of gods and accomplish nothing.

That is true, however it seems awesome visuals and awesome gameplay often cancel each other out. Think about it - how bloated today's games are? It has become normal to see upwards of ten gigabytes of disk space listed in system requirements - all this pretty much goes on visuals and sound. The more you spend on making those perfect, the less room you've got to fit actual playable content. Not to mention that visuals and sound are much easier produced than quality gameplay, which requires innovation. Corporate execs do not like innovation, its untried and risky. While everyone loves great visuals and crispy sound, so that gets the most funding.

It all boils down to a change of attitude on the corporate side, whichever way you turn it.

But when gamers buy the best, we encourage both innovation and graphics. Unless, you know, people keep buying the D&D games and Halo. Then I can sorta see your point, and that's why there are so many shooters in the industry, I'm afraid.