I think this is where a lot of people will disagree with you. Personally, I don't believe a person who created something should get that level of control. It's fine to control your possessions, i.e. things that can belong to only one person at the same time, and that happen to belong to you now. But I see absolutely no reason for which you should be able to control information. Not just music or games, and not just digital. Information - as abstract as it gets.

That is, if you and only yourself have it, it's of course immoral for me to coerce you to give it to me, or to take it from you against your will. But if you give (a copy of) that information to a third party, the third party now owns a copy, and should have the same rights about it as you have. Which includes giving that information to me, for free.

There's no other way for it to work that makes sense. Just like you don't have a right to tell something to someone and then issue a gag order, you shouldn't have such right to any other form of information.

Of course, exceptions are being made because of the economy, but then let's be clear - piracy is bad because of economic reasons, not moral ones. Morally you're privileged by being able to limit distribution of information in the first place.