I think I will take back what I said about sharing being a right, though in some cases I think piracy is defendable (e.g. when other "legal" means are available (as illustrated in post #75, or if you want to try out a game, etc). I don't fully condone piracy and I was mostly playing devil's advocate because I noticed inconsistencies in the anti-piracy arguments, specifically the one about piracy being theft (it's not always comparable to theft).
That's exactly my point though. Your argument is about a hypothetical situation that doesn't actually exist. You're claiming that hypothetically a sharing situation may exist between thousands of people. It's possible but falls foul of my proportionality rebuttal.
Such a chain would attract the attention of law enforcement should it ever exist and effectively nullify your argument. If you can produce a single valid real world example to furnish it then I'll happily concede
It doesn't exist but it is a possible alternative, and as long as it exists in theory it makes the illegality of internet sharing questionable at least to some extent (when it comes to some types of content).
It would indeed attract attention, but in the hypothetical situation I posed in post #75, the more (or really the only) likely outcome would be the introduction of DRM from content owners. AFAIK, you can't get arrested or fined for making copies of albums for personal use and I doubt that it can be made illegal. The same thing can be said about giving disks away. I asked this question before, how do you think this process could be made illegal? I think that this particular method is a legal loophole that's only avoidable with DRM which specifically states that the disc can only be used by one person and one person only.