Here's a moral question: Lets say someone only torrents shows that can otherwise be had from free OTA sources. Say their option is either to record a show OTA onto a Tivo, and watch it time shifted while skipping commercials... OR... download the show off of a torrent network, watch the show, then delete it. The difference in the end result is the method of delivery and nothing else. If something can't be had OTA or from Netflix, that person can purchase it from iTunes. So where is the line?

Do you have a Tivo? If so do you skip commercials? If so how do you separate that morally from downloading a show? Honest questions.

Another question: How are people getting "caught"? From whom were the warnings and by what methods did the warner obtain the info?

EDIT: After reading your last post I'm guessing you'll say the line is at the legal definition. I understand your point.

EDIT 2:

Quote:
That, and I still feel it is wrong, especially now being part of a gaming company who also survives by producing entertainment that people pay for.

And that is where I draw the line. If I can't obtain the same media for free legally by another method (like OTA), it gets paid for.