Again, let's use some examples: -How would you feel if, as a journalist, someone published a paper you submitted them without paying you, saying that they can't afford it? After all, there are no losses for you, they just used a digitial copy of your words -How would you feel if, as a photographer, someone published your photographs in a newspaper without asking or paying you, because they "can't afford to pay" and "no harm done it's just a digital copy"? -Would you eat in a fancy restaurant and leave without paying? You could also say "hey, i couldn't afford it, and if it wasn't for me the food would have gone to the garbage anyway, so no harm done"

Completely different situation. My argument was about someone accessing an already distributed media. You are arguing against the distribution of said media, which I clearly stated I am not talking about. Your example of someone publishing a photographers photographs is completely off mark, as I am talking specifically about the person who views the photographs which someone else has already taken from the photographer. On top of that, the restaurant is straight up theft of physical goods. Please don't Strawman me.

-Would you sneak into a cinema or theme park without paying? Because you could also say "hey there's no harm done, they don't lose money because i'm here". Sneaking into a cinema uses up some of their resources(seats), as does sneaking into a theme park (Increases the queues for paying customers)

-How would you feel if, as a programer, people used your code without permission and without paying you, because they can't afford it and "it's just a digital copy of your code, you don't lose anything"?

As a programmer, I certainly don't mind people using my programs for free if they can't afford them, not that I've published anything yet. Stealing my source code and using it is, again, a different matter.

You can't change the law just because you think it's right The law is changed quite often based on what people currently in power think is right.

Let's be honest. To download the Babymetal DVD you miust have a computer and an internet connection. If you can afford that, how plausible is it that you will never be able to afford a 30$ DVD? When people say "i can't afford it", it means "i would much rather spend my money elsewhere" or rather "i would much rather use my money for something that i can't pirate". The problem is, people want everything. Sometimes you have to choose if you don't have the money to buy everything you want.

None of these statements are true. You can access a computer without owning one. You can own a computer and an internet connection but not have any further funds. There are lots of circumstances different people are in and it's unfair to just say "If you can afford x you can also afford y". In the end, people have a limited amount of money and once they've spent it on what they want they have 0 left and there's 0 spending potential.