The real question is that will humanity morally accept or reject the concept we call 'copyright'.
When it comes to the ethics of copyright law, it boils down to economics. The consumer will always seek to purchase at the lowest price possible, and the corporation will always seek to sell at the highest price possible. Each side is driven by the ethics of what they determine to be "fair" and getting each other to agree on this will be impossible.
Netflix really "gets" the consumer argument for movies. I absolutely think the $10/month fee that I pay (probably a bit less than that) is a bargain and would gladly pay twice as much, but in all likelihood this price is going to go down over time. If the RIAA/MPAA were to take that example and provide us with such a service, then it would make economics-driven ethical sense.
The RIAA/MPAA really live in another reality where there can be no compromise.
In my experience, people generally believe that private consumption of copyrighted material should be unrestricted. That is, the part of copyright that gives the copyright holder an exclusive license to control distribution is overreaching, and should only apply to major commercial operations.