You've either missed the point or you're intentionally avoiding it.

The point is _not_ to simply "get the work done". If you're trying to make a buck, you need to get the work done better and quicker than any of your competitors. And they may have deeper pockets, more hardware, more developers, etc. The point of Scrum is to help managers and developers work as effectively as possible toward a common goal by, in part, removing all the crap that stands in the way.

Try to think this through just a little bit. Your advise to a company failing (but trying really hard) to be competitive is apparently "get on with your job". Alternatively, I suppose the employer should fire all of the developers and try again with a fresh batch.

The fact that your post was modded "insightful", I think is an indication that people would really like it to be true that software development is brain-dead simple. It's not. Sometimes even "talented" developers can benefit by learning techniques that have proven effective in the past.

How can you be sure you'd never pay for it, now that you know you can get it for free?

If you decided to not break the rules, you'd be asking yourself "Is this thing worth $10?". If it was the _only_ way to get it, then you'd be making an honest assessment of that.

Now you're asking yourself "Should I pay $10 or $0?". Have you really convinced yourself that the fact you can get it for free hasn't skewed your sense of what it's worth?

Maybe you can convince yourself that this particular thing is only worth $1. Shouldn't you refrain from downloading it for free until you've paid someone that dollar? Or is it the case that you've convinced yourself that everything you want to get for free by breaking the rules is actually worthless?