This article says the only way to stop copyright piracy is to cut prices link here. It reports the results of a study called the Media Piracy Project published by the Social Science Research Council. This defines the problem in a somewhat limited way as it only looks at relatively poor countries where prices are the same as those in rich countries. For the poor, the pain of paying rich country prices is unacceptable and their consumers are willing to violate the law, even when they risk "three strikes and you're off the internet" or other penalties.

To charge lower prices in a neighboring country is to risk arbitrage and probable rejection by copyright owners. Thus none of us should expect any change in copyright moralizing about "thieves". Monopolist-economists would instead suggest maximizing revenue by continued price discrimination, probably on a less extreme scale. But please, no more moralizing.

From the consumers' point of view, competitive market prices would be better. But since copyright is a legal monopoly--of almost unlimited extent in practice--we seem to be stuck with it until public opinion shifts. That could happen when the public gives up GDP as the sole measure of the good and includes some measure of welfare.

I doubt a change from GDP to another measure would help.

The copyright lobby's argument is not so sophisticated that it rests on strong copyright increasing GDP (does it in fact do so?). It is based on claimed positive benefits on employment, claimed fairness and moral arguments, and the need for an incentive.