We've had this discussion before like a million times so I'm not really in the mood to repeat the salient points but suffice to say you're wrong.
He isn't wrong though. There are people for whom illegal downloading is an alternative to paying, rather than a separate entity. There are people who won't buy a t-shirt or go see a show.
Here, we support musicians that we care about, so it's easy for us to argue in favour of filesharing. We're part of a specialised market that allows for that kind of flexibility regarding 'illegal' downloading without presenting a moral quandary.
The top 200 billboard however is a completely different kind of monster. In this context, filesharing is as different as the circumstances surrounding the artists.
While a small band can and will benefit from filesharing, the billboard 200 crowds take a significant hit in sales. Perhaps it's partly because people realise how awful the music is now before they pay for it, but I sincerely doubt that. It's because they no longer have to buy the CD to enjoy the product. They will download the song, they will listen to it until they hate and then they won't buy the t-shirt.
That is a market significantly larger than the one that we are a part of and every day it's costing more money than you'll probably ever have in your life. While we can argue that people who affiliate themselves with the majors or are successful enough to chart don't deserve money, that is not what the debate is. The debate is whether or not illegal downloading can be theft. We can argue about the definition of theft all day, but basically...
If you have a product on your iPod that the artist probably intended for you to pay for and you didn't...
...they have lost money.
Not being able to afford music in the first place is not a factor in this argument because if you can't afford music, then you can't afford it, file sharing or no. These arguments apply to the people who could conceivably be paying for music but choose not to. I have a suspicion that a lot of people who use the "I can't afford music" argument have no problem spending money on shoes they don't need, so dismiss that argument every time you hear it. Not being able to afford something is not the same as spending your money on something else instead.
It's not about whether or not file sharing is appropriate. It's about when and where it is. It is up to the individual to decide whether or not it is stealing based on their own habits regarding the downloading of music.
BeoPuppy has decided that if he doesn't pay for music, then he is stealing it. Hats off to him for saying something that a lot of people here don't seem to want to say.
I steal music. Just like you.