"ebay example works on the principal that the seller would have copied the dvd b4 selling it on."
Well yes if you are going to include "theft" and dishonesty in your eBay example then it somewhat matches the "theft" and dishonesty in illegally file sharing a DVD.
However a normal and honest eBay sale is nothing at all like illegally downloading that DVD.
"I really don't think it's theft to watch something for free that you would watch for free at a later date anyway."
Where can you watch something for free?
Most commercial stations rely on advertising revenue, which is dependant on viewing figures.
So if people download and don't watch then the show won't get the ratings and, the TV channel will stop showing the show and the production company might have to stop it's production.
Even the BBC, where you could argue shows are kind of free, relies on viewing figures to justify what they spend in buy a show.
"And most TV series that people fileshare on are established and popular TV shows (e.g Lost and Heroes) that are not going to be dropped and don't need to have every season plugged."
So it's OK for someone to steal a show as they rely on enough other people being honest so as to keep the viewing figures up and therefore the show being made? Someone can be dishonest because enough other people are honest? Is that really justifiable? If many other people buy BMWs can I therefore go and steal one? BMW's are popular and established and don't need to sell every car.
I'm not sure where I stand on downloading and then re-watching it when it is aired.
It's a bit like that old chestnut of eating sweets in a supermarket before paying for them.
Or to use a more accurate analogy taking sweets that someone else has shoplifted and then going to pay for them later.
Basically it's very much the case that anyone who downloads and then doesn't consume the product in the "normal" way later can't call themselves a fan of something.
Someone who does later consume it "normally", well you're still on very dodgy ground. After all if word gets around that "many" people have downloaded something a TV company might feel justified in putting in a lower bid for the rights to show a program.
So you're still hurting the people who make the thing you claim to love.
If people watching something for free before it was distributed didn't hurt viewing figures or could actually encourage more viewers then we'd see a lot of TV shows being marketed that way.
We don't.