Whoever mentioned the commercial interests? It is simply about whether one sees such sharing (evading paying) as stealing or not. You might say that no stealing takes place (simple copying) but if a person would have bought rather than receive a free copy then that is effectively what has happened - the artist has lost that sale. It basically is down to ease of doing the sharing/acquiring and your own morality along with a large dose of peer pressure. As in most things there are no black and whites but the scale of the issue is the problem with many these days never buying anything that they can get for free. Perhaps this is what will happen in the future and I would have done much the same in the same situation but I still believe it is morally not right. As I said, would anyone be prepared to work for nothing - so why would you deprive somone of their income simply because you can. Whether the artists deserve such large amounts is perhaps relevant but then there are much richer people one might propose regarding this question and who probably less deserve their wealth. Perhaps we need more of this attitude these days - (link ⚠️ ↗)

PS I've never cheated in an exam ....