Do lawsuits lower piracy?

lower the prices, we know they can. Why should we have to pay upwards of 30 bux for a new dvd, when China gets them for 2! If fighting piracy was their concern they would lower the prices of their products worldwide, not just in a single hotspot. All they care about is profits, and will bitch and moan to hide their true intentions.

We know they can lower their prices, especially when the raw cost of recording the CD/DVD is only $1 (especially when we as consumers can get quality DVD media for 50 cents/ea. and a jewel case for 50 cents...come on!) We know it's sad and greedy, but the problem is the average consumer doesn't. That is the truest of tragedies. :c

As we all know, even when the individual’s life is threatened, as in a wartime espionage mission, people will do what they feel is moral/just. They might hide their true allegiance, but when the opportunity presents itself, the motivation to correct an injustice reigns highest. “Intellectual Property Rights [IPR]”, “Patents” and such demands for perpetual income are usually strung along a finely balanced demarcation in which morality is seldom called upon to judge. Especially when theives, corrputed, damaged and unbalanced personalities are driving the issue along the amoralised commercial highway. Coveting others’ propety [like money] whilst giving junk in return through psychologically manipulated advertisements [i.e to fashionised] is as much a criminal act as stealing others’ morally structured IPR. The pricing of an item is only one influencing factor towards its valuation. Curiosity is another but the feeling of satisfaction, which is another word for the sense of injustice, offers the strongest motivation. As in buying expensive semi-junk software or seeing monopoly at work. When a whore “advertises” its wares, is that a commercial proposition or it is a moral issue. To a pimp/whore, there is only one issue. The right to survive, regardless. When something is commercialised, there can be no such thing as morality. There is only the excuse of the right to survive. Commercialisation is merely perfuming the whore as a lovely, fragrant flower. How topsy-turvy it is when the immoral junk of humanity, masquerading as amorality [there is no such a thing], demands morality from others. When the licentiousness of a prositute is wagged in front of a similarly damaged customer, that is their business, but such activities have no place when Innocence is required [especially within the realms of those practising “religions”, which is the fashion of being “holy”]. As such, the greed and corruption that is IPR/crap patents/etc, do have the right to their own den of theivery but to bring them onto the unwary masses using the corruptive influcence of junk/fashion advertising [is there any other type], that must be exposed. But not when thieves are also running a government. Democracy might allow immorality a hearing but true democracy is about being moral, not the right to abandon sensibilty. Similarly, there can be no freedom when maturity [not the maturity of being able to copulate or corrupt] is absent. The freedom within democracy is about the maturity of being moral. Not the right to seek out whores or become thieves through the exhortation of grabbing others’ properties using the fashion of nationalism. Something called Demoncrazy.