The problem is with endless compensation due to logical ownership of something which no longer costs practically anything.
Physical property theft always has a victim and loss. Copying something illegally is technically theft but the effects are nowhere near physical property theft.
The plot thickens when we then consider legal copying and then illegal sharing. After all, I could buy a book and lend it to a friend and that's fine but if it's an Ebook then that's not fine. I can share my DVD with mates but if it's a movie download then not. But what if it's legal to share with freinds. Is there a legal definition of friend that we can actually enforce? What if I have 1200+ friends? (If my facebook bitch armada really counts as friends)
Personally If I like something and think it is of value I happily pay for it. I have DVDs of PC games that I have never actually opened as the physical copy was not required. Yet I paid because I valued the work.
But let's go back to your point of justification. Actually my using content even for free in its entirety is of immense value. Like songs on a radio. Somewhere along the chain I have paid something in related fees.
I paid for the broadcasting license, I paid for the cable TV channel or indeed the cinema ticket etc etc. What if I did not pay for any of those? -there is still value for the people that made the effort to create the "intellectual property" as I am likely to recommend something I enjoyed or see value in whether that is the film itself or something in it.
As any aspiring artist will tell you, just having people to listen, view, read and enjoy the material is an achievement in and of itself. Does it pay the rent? yes, it literally does. Can you be greedy and want more? yes, always.
Look at "youtube stars" there was no such thing once. No one promised them money. They did not ask for any but their POPULARITY gives them earning potential. Films make money not by being good they make money by being popular. If I somehow chose to see a film for free and liked it and told someone else the value is X.
X because that person might choose to watch the film as well in the cinema or buy the merchandise, mug, t-shirt, squeaky toy or get the cable channel with the awesome movies.
So you might be thinking the value is quite possibly 0 but it isn't. It's certainly a non-zero sum. When you watch a film you may think it's you paying for some intellectual property but I'm sure we all realise there is a lot more going on. Huge company are vying for mind share. A share of your mind, your psyche.
The hot chick drinking coke zero? she aint there cause she likes coke. The cool dude with the Ray Ban glasses got paid to wear them. You are sold products, ideas, lifestyles, looks and popularity all the time. Why? so you can CONSUME. Food, products, ideas etc.
Imagine for a moment that you can release content that will be viewed by a milling people, for free. Is there no value in it for you? Can you not think of how this actually pays? You think studios do not know their movies will be copied? showed a billing times on network TV? -they are not selling a story, a film is a product of immense complexity.
But forget all that because when studios bill themselves internally for editing their own movies and other shenanigans just to produce a net loss so they don't pay tax it really does not help endear the argument to "pay for the effort" when it can often big a big scam. The artists get paid. The actors get paid, the camera crew, sound crews etc etc that is part of the cost to make the film. The studio counts profit and then counts theoretical profit it may have had should you have actually paid for your illegal copy.
Here's the real kicker. Illegal downloaders are statistically more likely to PAY FOR FILMS. The rate of consumption for these people has often outpaced their ability to pay the fees. Which means they never had the money to buy it to begin with...but even if they did have the money they are still paying more than Joe Average. If all these films were not making any money and all the effort for these people was not being compensated for SOMEHOW then the industry would have died a long time ago instead of making more and more money.
Here is another reality check. People have a certain amount of time in a day they can choose to spend doing whatever they want. Look at the amount of films that are currently coming out. Is there enough time for people to watch all those films for them to be profitable? -I'll just leave that thought there. Something to mull over.
Anyways, you can claim your magic poem is worth a trillion dollars because you made some effort but the market decides what its worth, not you. Intellectual property or not.
People bent on piracy will continue and there is no way to stop it completely. I agree that it's about the experience, cinema or not so let's digest making the experience better. Making the viewing experience worse for legitimate paying customers which makes up the vast majority ends up costing more than its worth and does not prevent piracy.
I leave you with this amusing image which has told me much of what I needed to know years ago -> http://img.labnol.org/di/pirat...
Please note I have not earned anything writing this but if you find it useful I'm glad.