You have it backwards. It's a relative minority that recognizes it as a legitimate concept. It's just that this minority lobbied for the laws.

(As a curiosity, these same minorities lobby for the opposite, or turn a blind eye, when it's contrary to their interests. See the current LLM craze, and also... did you know Hollywood was founded on copyright infringement, and that its location was chosen to enable this? Put that in your pipe and smoke it).

(Or also: many AAA game developers played pirated games in their youth. It was part of their formative years. )

Most people don't believe in the concept. You don't either, regardless of your protests here: you admitted you pirate everything. If you believed this was deeply immortal and harmful you wouldn't.

Your actions speak louder than your words.

> As a curiosity, these same minorities lobby for the opposite, or turn a blind eye, when it's contrary to their interests.

> See the current LLM craze

Excellent point. Watching the corporations engage in AI washing of massive scale copyright infringement was extremely disgusting.

I don't even fault them for doing it, technology should not be held back due to intellectual property nonsense. It's the "rules for thee but not for me" nonsense that's offensive.

> did you know Hollywood was founded on copyright infringement, and that its location was chosen to enable this?

Plenty of industries were. Samuel Slater, the so called father of the american industrial revolution, memorized british designs before immigrating to the US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Slater

I used to have a small collection of examples just like this. If I remember correctly, some drug companies chose specific European countries due to their stance on intellectual property.

Infringement is only inconvenient when others do it to them, never when they do it to others. Every monopolist was once an infringer. They always climb the ladder and try to kick it out so the next guy can't touch them.