You wouldn't download a car.

Ironically, that whole anti-piracy campaign used a pirated font:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/04/you-wouldnt-steal-a-...

The difference is: You're making copies of something:

  Scenario 1: I take your baguette. Your hand is empty. You starve.
  Scenario 2: I take your baguette recipe. You still have a baguette recipe. You continue to live.
  Scenario 3: I take your baguette recipe and publish it. Your customers leave you. You starve.

Copying someone's IP can also impact you economically if your financial model depends on you being the only distributor of copies of something.

Should we enforce the protection of people's right to have monopoly of distribution of intellectual property?

Or should we accept that in reality, copies are free and distribution monopolies only exist in inefficient markets?

It seems totally right to protect people's intellectual property.

But information wants to be free.

It's a dilemma. Do we side what feels right, or what's real?