system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV : In most cases, the pirates that only download but do not upload copyrighted content are causing no loss to the copyright holder.

Think about it. **If they have no means to pay the copyright holder, either because they have the money but not the compatible payment media (for example, Sony doesn't accept debit cards, at least from many countries), or they have no money at all.**

All they're doing is downloading something that is available on the internet. **They would not have been able to pay the copyright holder even if they wanted to, and thus they are causing no loss to the copyright holder.**
Whether it is moral to enjoy something without paying for it is questionable, I would allege, as much as overcharging for goods and services, as is the practice. However, that is not what I want a discussion on. I want only to discuss about whether and if yes, then how loss is caused to the copyright holder by people who illegally download copyrighted content without paying, as they have no means to make the payment.
gpt
**(1)** The implication of your question is that pirates who upload *are* hurting copyright holders.

**(2)** Without people who upload, nobody could download.  People who upload, do so because the infrastructure exists (P2P sites).

**(3)** The infrastructure exists because it's profitable, which is why all these sites have ads.  It's profitable because people download, thereby causing the traffic.

**(4)** People who download incent the advertisers.  The advertisers incent the P2P sites.  The P2P sites incent the uploaders.  The uploaders hurt copyright holders.

**Conclusion:**  Downloaders are the basis of an economy which hurts copyright holders, even if they themselves never uploaded anything.