I don't think many here would say copyright infringement is not wrong, there are many of us who ourselves are creators of various works (photographers, musicians, actors/actresses, programmers). But I am one of that group, and I still vehemently argue that copyright infringement is not theft. The 2 are very different things, it is not denying the owner anything in many cases - as they wouldn't have got the custom in the first place etc... It is much more complex than theft.
As for theft / copyright infringement argument ... that has been done to death. If you create a copy the copy effectively belongs to the person with the licence / ownership to publish it ... so it is still theft. It does not belong to the person who creates the copy or owns the original. Another important aspect of theft is that it is the "dishonest appropriation of property", and since we all know copying the item is illegal then we knowingly commit an dishonest act.
Indeed, it can seriously affect many people, however not to the extent trumpeted by the music and film industries, where they equate one download as one lost sale (more of that bizarre Hollywood accounting again?)
This is not a victimless crime, it can seriously affect artists, authors and musicians ... and trying to justify it by saying that some aspects of the entertainment industry is dodgy in itself is pure sophistry ... you might as well turn round and justify the death penalty for children who steal small amounts as it stops them from becoming adults who steal large amounts.
I don't think they do get 'what they deserve'. I think the system as it stands is unfair, like the industry itself. Any industry that can use scare tactics to threaten innocent people with court etc... is not an innocent one itself. (There have been hundreds of examples of this, and in the UK it has lead to several solicitors being remonstrated by their professional standards body).
At the moment anyone who aids theft, copyright infringement, etc and does so knowing it is illegal gets what they deserve. If the law is to be changed then it has to be reasonable to those who produce the original material, it has to be reasonable to those who want to make music and video on the range of devices *they* own, it has to be reasonable to those who need to oversee it (including not having to rely on expensive or overly restrictive technical solutions which are likely to increase costs to people either through the initial purchase, the ongoing costs through ISPs or other add-ons) and it has to encourage people to stay within the law.
As much as I agree with those who shout and scream that the present system is broken ... why not also shout down those who say piracy is the answer. It isn't ... a change of law is ... and piracy is the wrong tool to try and force that change.