My favorite variation is the, "well yes, you did buy seat heaters in your car, the hardware is there, the software is there and you over paid for all of it, including taxes. Now, that'll be $10 per month for us to enable it".

That's no different than IBM selling a mainframe with more processors and storage than you've paid to access.

Except that the IBM one is B2B, preceded by negotiations.

But then, what is important is what the customers were told they are buying. And while IBM didn't sell anything they didn't deliver (on the mainframe business), the cars are sold through 3rd parties famous for being sleazy, so I'd bet their customers experience was all over the place.

You're correct. There is no material difference.

I understand this, but when there is a charge for viewing then piracy is stealing.

My issue with this is the use of the word "buy". If DRM can remove my access, and I don't have perpetual ownership and control of that DRM, then it isn't buying and shouldn't be labelled as such. I can then make an informed choice "rent" vs "watch-as-many-times-as-the-drm-provider-lets-me". It should have the side effect of encouraging there to be a _real_ "buy" option

Ok, point taken. Not "stealing", but still not paying the price of access. Making a movie or tv show etc. isn't free of cost, and if you want to watch it then it has a value

So anti-piracy people should change their message. Calling people that pirate stuff thieves is rude; most of them opt for piracy because can't pay, doesn't care too much to pay or is averse of industry praxis such this Sony's clusterfuck.

I guess "stealing" is done by "thieves" but i didn't mean to be so harsh, next time i'll be more careful with my words. Whilst copying bits has negligible cost, the _original_ cost of production has to be borne by someone, do the people paying to watch pay more to cover those that don't pay? The price of access is part of the license, another example would being crediting sources when using cc by-sa material. Sony's actions here don't engender any sympathy, but with piracy i'm more concerned with the writers and artists etc..

What I _meant_ to emphasise was that the button shouldn't be labelled "buy" if someone else can take it away. Not allowing this label this would help steer people away from situations like Sony just created, and help encourage DRM-free options.