(Warez defined)
Digital technology (and not even in reference to A.I.) has devalued human-generated artistic product, since the access to means of production is far less rarefied than in "the analog days." Musicians, composers and producers are now expected to create or license music for a fraction of what had used to be standard rates. Neophytes and veterans in the music industry compete for the same fees and royalties, now. Streaming services' royalties (a tiny fraction of what radio play has traditionally, and legally, commanded) are settled-for by musical artists who are in great competition with every other monkey with a laptop, and most of the new ones don't know nor care that they're being exploited so that the owners of the platforms can live well by a "sustainable" business model. Musicians have to make their music available at no cost, and hope that rewards and dividends might magically come their way otherwise.
Conditions now are such that Musicians no longer pay their dues, they "grow" their "brands." People "get into music" with the inflated expectation of making money from it, rather than work for years to get matriculated into an industry of rarefied paid gigs and sessions. Many new, technologically-based musicians hem-and-haw about whether they should have to bother to learn music theory, since their computers and DAWs do a lot of that heavy lifting. The online, global market is glutted with music; some of it profitable, but most of it not.
Add to this mix that a digital product such as music is not a finite commodity, like a can of beans or a loaf of bread. One doesn't "steal" music like one steals a can of beans or loaf of bread – obtaining it gratis does not deplete a finite supply, against which the value of a commodity is set. Besides, a musician has to accept that it's better to get the music heard than to wait for someone to not to pay to listen to it.
The same is to be said of software. People have to be getting it for free, to learn to use it and to become reliant upon it, and develop a proficiency in it. That may or may not lead to a loyalty to the brand or necessity for the product resulting in purchasing legit copies of it for the sake of updates and tech support. How else are FabFilter, U-He, Valhalla, and other developers of effects plug-ins going to be able to differentiate their products from those of their competition – which has become rife with upstart developers trying to get into the game and making a lot of their plug-ins available at no cost – but by getting as many people as possible actually using it and developing preferences for it?
Furthermore, warez are almost never obtained at the expense of a paid purchase; most of the downloads are by people who could never pay for the software, anyway. In the glutted software market, warez are the best publicity for it. Software developers have to accept that, like musicians lower in the food chain, they have to permit or tolerate their works' being obtained at no cost to end users, in hope of gaining their loyalty and revenue in the future, or by such users' recommending the products to people who are in a position to purchase them.
I once watched two software developers laugh, to my face, about "musicians wanting to be paid for their work." When software engineers see their immunity to the reality of the economics of ones-and-zeroes fade, and not least by dint of A.I.'s ability to "build" software, they'll be sharing single-room hovels with former film producers, who had tried to low-ball musicians on licensing rates or mere promises of "exposure" as compensation, and who'd been similarly rendered redundant by a common enemy. I'll be making money off them by selling them my recipes for ramen noodles.