That's my point, consumers are looking out for themselves... by pirating, and publishers are in no small part encouraging it by treating PC gamers as second class citizens.
they are looking out for themselves i the exact way a theif does, seriously, I could go kill a man right now because I THINK he may insult me in the future, but that doesn't make it right.
the problem with EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE you have posted is that there is no credible source other than a supposed contact who is unknown, this could be made up, it could be biased, it could be purposly missleading.
they refuse to show people the results of their testing, that can only mean so many things, they might not exist, the test showed that there was nothing wrong with piracy and they don't want you to know it, (but that makes no sense because than why would they care? if piracy is having a no to positive effect than why wouldn't you release the information and encourage more of it?) or the test showed that it was an issue and they don't want that information released (also doesn't make sense if it PROVES that piracy is as big an issue as they claim why wouldn't they publish it, it would make the process of legal protection that much faster). so basically it makes no logical sense for such a test to remain secret, because it can only have posative ramifications for the industry.
also, most testing (not gonna source it because I have never seen a single test in this specific area that hasn't drawn this conclusion in some way, regardless of whether they are pro/no piracy inclined, and I CBF finding ALL of them) has shown that people that pirate things often spend more than average money ELSEWHERE in the industry, this is more likely due to being more interested in the entertainment industry than most people rather than because piracy magically makes them spend money, also, what are you gonna pirate, the multibillion dollar corporations game that has piracy protection up the wazzu and you know exactly what it is and how it plays, or the dingy little indie game that is practically unprotected and you're not even sure you'll like it? if you purchased the first and pirated the second (most likely option) than you have effectively negatively harmed the industry, if you purchased the second and pirated the first (unlikely because it's usually more trouble than it's worth and most people don't want to risk money on an indie game) than you have had nearly no negative effects on the market, if you pirated both than you're a poor idiot who should stop playing games and get a job (or at least go on welfare).
in the end it's stealing, sure in some cases it's not having an effect because the people pirating it wouldn't have bought it anyway because there are no physical properties being stolen (digital games and media rely on payments for the time put into creating the thing, not the materials used in it's construction, because code is free) and in others they pirated something that they either end up buying later or they pirated it from a company that isn't heavily effected by it, but a lot of the time there are victims, if you pirate from a smaller developer (even if they have a multi-billion doller publisher, remember, you pirate something published by EA and you're not just taking profits from them, you're taking profits from the already tiny chunk of change the actual creators get at the end) or you pirate in such a way that it raises prices (starbucks have had to raise some of their prices to account for the amount of people that ordered drinks then sent them back because they changed their mind/ ordered the wrong thing, same applies to piracy, people pirate something they ptherwise would have bought and it cuts out of the projected profits that they used to figure expenditures), than you are having a negative effect on the industry that you supposedly like so much.
So I don't care what argument you make, you haven't cited any credible source (and none of the articles you linked have either) and at the core of the thing it is stealing, and unless you are absolutely and truthfully in a position to say that you wouldn't have bought it anyway (not because you wouldn't wanted to have or you thought it was too expensive, I mean you literally have no money and no income to put towards it now or in 50 years time) than doing it is wrong and has a negative effect on the industry, and if the industry goes under (any further than it already has, I'm sure you have no idea how bad a state the industry is in financially) than you can kiss games goodbye, nobody new will be able to move in and nobody currently in control will want to continue.
TL;DR: don't do it unless you have a bloody good reason.