It would appear the law has more of a distinction between the two issues than SLM does - stealing cable is a criminal offence, copyright infringement is not.
I should mention I despise cable theft, visit the cinema at least once a month, last month was the 3D version of Up, and in addition purchase more legitimate content now than I ever have at any point in my life, Amazon delivered the full 'V' collection to me this morning.
Apparently paradoxically they yesterday delivered me 100 DVD-Rs and I think it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that my plans for those aren't entirely legitimate.
The point is you can't tar everyone with the same brush, while some may think going to the cinema is stupid it's an experience you just can't totally replicate at home regardless of how good your home cinema is and I don't even have home cinema, and as far as content goes
nothing beats a quality original. A burned copy is temporary, an original if the content merits it is for life.
TV wise I have Sky+ HD and multiroom, full channel pack + sport + movies. It would appear my evil downloading habits have purely positive effects on my expenditure for content given that the last 3 PC games we've purchased this year were all downloaded first then purchased.
Perhaps I'm atypical but I'd like to think I'm not. Either way I'll stick to my view that theft of cable service is a crime, potentially degrades other people's service, and usually has a demonstrable cost to the company which the content is being stolen from unlike the movie and film industries whose claims of lost revenue due to piracy are precarious to say the least... but I'm getting off topic a touch