"People giving out the same thing as you for free" describes not just piracy, but anyone who is giving away a substitute good. It's the same argument Microsoft can make against OpenOffice or Linux. The same argument the Post Office might have against email.
The fact that many software products do well on the market despite rampant piracy illustrates that there are plenty of customers who are willing to pay, and see the value in buying the product even when pirated copies are available.
So if your product isn't performing as well enough to be viable, and you don't know whether to attribute it to (a) pirates copying it for free, or (b) the possibility that your product isn't very good, what response is more likely to generate positive value? You can (a) fight the pirates, incurring additional expense and/or diminishing the value proposition for your paying customers; or (b) improve the quality of your product in ways that actual customers will appreciate anyway.
If the answer is (a), and the target market for your product is composed mostly of freeloading jerks, you're probably focusing on the wrong market.
The fact that many software products do well on the market despite rampant piracy illustrates that there are plenty of customers who are willing to pay, and see the value in buying the product even when pirated copies are available.
So if your product isn't performing as well enough to be viable, and you don't know whether to attribute it to (a) pirates copying it for free, or (b) the possibility that your product isn't very good, what response is more likely to generate positive value? You can (a) fight the pirates, incurring additional expense and/or diminishing the value proposition for your paying customers; or (b) improve the quality of your product in ways that actual customers will appreciate anyway.
If the answer is (a), and the target market for your product is composed mostly of freeloading jerks, you're probably focusing on the wrong market.