One of the biggest mistakes that music/film/software industries make is assuming that each pirated copy is a direct revenue loss. I don't know if that's what they actually believe, though it's often reported this way in the media and I'm pretty sure organisations like RIAA support that style of reporting. Though the problem is, not everyone who pirates something would pay for it if that were the only way of obtaining it. Certainly the higher the price, the less likely that is to occur.
Here's the funny thing about "piracy=lost sales": there's no good reason to believe that anyone believes it.
The RIAA is a group of lawyers whose best interest is directly behind saying it, particularly if they don't believe it. If you can sell an eternal war, you can guarantee a whole lot of budget for an awful long time.
The studios themselves are largely obsolete. The top 10% are on borrowed time; their job won't exist after the transition to digital is complete.
The analysts will remain, the accountants will remain, the producers will remain. But there'll be no advantage to having Sony records in its entirety, let alone the overpaid execs. All you need is some good producers/engineers, a marketing agency and an accountant.
So, if suing delays the transition, it enriches the decision makers by extending the time over which they draw a check. If it doesn't, oh well, it's only shareholder money being burned. Either way, the lawsuits give them a perpetual excuse for missed revenue targets.
And the longer the shareholders are unable to muster any defense, the further "lawsuits as business model" gets pushed. Sue digital radio. Sue terrestrial radio. Sue incidental recordings in online videos. Sue everyone, because the heads are out of ideas.
