Not at all, of course you should expect payement. I'm talking about more obvious cases here. Let's say you discovered a 12 year-old had cracked his copy of your software and was using it, more for a hobby than much else as he's not experienced enough to understand it all; would you press charges or not?
A lot of companies in the industry are smart enough to realize this, this is why Discreet hasn't prosecuted anyone for using 3DS Max even with obvious evidence of widespread piracy [even if you start on a pirated copy, you WILL get caught sooner or later, so you're forced to register it as soon as you can afford it] or why Alias Wavefront released a free version of Maya that is limited only with lack of plugins and a light watermark over the render- they know that it takes years to learn their software and that those warez kiddies are potencial buyers in the future.

Going back to my original point, the industry right now treats pretty much all pirated copies as lost revenues and is using those figures to secure better laws and positions for themselves. But a great deal of those copies are used by a group that is obviously incapable of paying for it [young kids, people in countries where your average monthly fee is less than a cost of a legal copy].
My question is, should they be allowed to make laws that are based on research statistics so obviously flawed?

Statistics are painfully easy to manipulate** to say what you want them to say and unfortunately, they do seem to be getting their way right now.



**
To give you a real life example:

"Would you like to feel safer?"
"Yes."
"Do security cameras make you feel safer?"
"Yes."

And then comes the question they don't ask:
"Would you like security camera monitoring for your own safety?"
"No."