Legal Action Against Downloaders

Recently anime companies have taken legal action against anime downloaders (individuals who downloaded anime but may not have made it available to others) in Singapore. In a slightly different scenario, the North American RIAA took legal action against various music filesharers (individuals who downloaded, and propagated the availability of the content they downloaded). Meanwhile the anime industry has never taken direct action against file-sharers or downloaders in North America, focusing their legal enforcement activities on individuals and organizations that are first and foremost involved in making "pirated" content available (uploaders, etc..).

As always, we understand that the exact answer you want may not be available, please either select the closest answer, or skip the question.

Do you think it's acceptable for companies to take legal action against individuals who consume (download / purchase) "pirated" material?
Yes, companies should be able to do whatever it takes to combat piracy.
Only if an acceptable, legal alternative is available to the consumer.
No, it's never acceptable to take action against the end consumer, even if they are consuming "pirated" content.
Only in cases where the individual has acquired a significant quantity of pirated content.
Do you think it's acceptable for companies to take legal action against individuals who "file share" (make content that they have, or are currently downloading available to other downloaders via methods such as bittorrent)?
Yes.
Only if an acceptable, legal alternative is available to the consumer.
Only in cases where the individual is "sharing" a significant amount of content.
Never.
Do you think it's acceptable for companies to take legal action against individuals who take an active role in making "pirated" content available to others, with no monetary compensation involved?
Yes, these people are the source of the problem.
Only if an acceptable, legal alternative is available to the consumer, otherwise these people are just "enabling" consumers.
Only in cases where the individual is making a significant amount of content available.
Never.
What if the above individual was charging money (charging subscription fees, selling bootleg DVDs, etc...) ?
Yes, bootleggers are evil.
Only if an acceptable, legal alternative is available to the consumer.
Only if the individual is making a profit, trying to cover his costs is okay.
Never.
When it comes to anime, what would you consider "an acceptable, legal alternative" (select all that apply) ?
Free, online streams
Free download to own.
Ad supported online streams.
Ad supported download to own.
Local, translated home video (DVDs, Blu-Ray, etc...)
Imported Japanese home video, untranslated.
Imported Japanese home video, with subtitles.
Imported home video from any country with subtitles I can read.
TV (Broadcast, cable, sattelite,etc...)
TV Video on Demand
Subscription online streams.
Pay per view online streams.
Purchased download to own.
A locally available theatrical screening (for movies)
When it comes to download to own, is DRM acceptable?
Yes
Only if it works properly and always allows me to watch content I paid for on whatever platform I chose.
Never
For downloads and streams, what is the minimum acceptable video quality?
Youtube quality (300x240)
ANN Video Player quality (504 x 384)
DVD / NTSC (640x480 approx.)
HD Video / 720p (1280x720)