I can't speak to media piracy, but I previously did work with a large supplier of professional software. This is not stuff people often use for fun, and the software had free and easy-to-get student versions available. The software still saw 80+% piracy in many markets according to internal metrics. This is a big part of why companies are so enthusiastic about cloud everything - recurring revenue is nice, but unpirateable recurring revenue is even nicer.

That's not to defend this bill. It sounds like rubbish to me.

Tools like Photoshop, Ableton, ArcGIS, Maya, AutoCAD, or Matlab rely on widespread piracy to remain the industry standard (also cheaper student versions and university site licenses, but those aren’t enough by themselves), and make up the lost income by soaking professional users from established firms. If large numbers of people can’t affordably access these, they will adopt some alternative cheaper tool and ultimately bleed users, understanding, and activity away.

Does making pirating some software impossible actually increase its sales revenue? I'd wager that most people who pirate software wouldn't want to, are even have the means to pay for the full price of the software.

I'm totally on board with copying is not theft

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4

Except that it is something. I go to my tax accountant, have them calculate my taxes, then, when they send me the filled out paperwork I make a copy, send back the originals, and say "No thanks. Didn't really need this". What would we call that? Theft of time? Theft of labor? Breach of contract? (I didn't sign a contract). Breach of implied contract? Does any of this apply to movies/music? It feels similar except there's more than 1 person making a copy and they didn't "pre-order". Do those differences matter? It still feels like taking the product of someone's labor without compensating them for it, same as the tax accountant example.

The analogy fails because the tax accountant has finite time to spend completing tax returns and your action directly took some of that time. Whereas with IP, there are not a limited amount of bits to copy and you making that copy did not restrict the availability of those bits to someone else.

The content makers also have limited time to make content. There's no difference. The accountant made some content, a tax form, I copied it. The movie maker made some content, a movie, I copied it.

Obviously, but no one wants to go after the crimes their donors have committed. From tax "avoiding" to outright fraud. The amount of money lost to the tax payer by these actual criminals makes the small amount lost to piracy look like traces of cocaine on a dollar bill.