I think you've stated a position rather more strongly than I did in the article. There are certainly cases where free copying is bad for the content producer -- but my point in "piracy is progressive taxation" is that the damage happens most to people who can most afford it (i.e. those already well known), while there is a benefit to those who are not well known. As with the taxation system, it *may* be worthwhile to trade off the harm to one for a greater benefit. And if you're a publisher, the benefit in distributing your sales over more product may lead to a stronger business overall. "Frontlist" driven publishing, where you have to create new product all the time to get revenue, is much less profitable than "backlist" publishing, where products whose development costs have been recouped, keep on selling. And those are the kinds of sales that are increased by better exposure and availability of older product.
I'm not saying any of this is simple. There will be lots of disruption. But eventually, systems find a new equilibrium. I'm mainly speaking out against those who say the sky is falling. Just that inevitably, publishers will survive because they play an important role, not because they protect an entrenched position with draconian contracts and draconian digital rights management initiatives.