Indeed, the fact the the MPAA’s ad uses over-the-top examples is a big part of why it’s so bad. But the major flaw in the MPAA’s ad is that they are comparing easy-to-copy goods (DVDs) with hard-to-copy goods (cars and purses). For example, if I steal your car, you can no longer enjoy the use of it. If I steal your purse and take all your money, you can no longer use that money. However, if I copy a DVD you own, I can enjoy the content on that DVD without reducing the enjoyment you receive from it.
If the MPAA wants respect, they have to be honest with the consumer. DVDs and CDs are not like hard-to-copy goods. The MPAA needs to explain that to consumers and show that copyright serves a useful purpose (if it does) by demonstrating that their business model is the best for consumers.
Fortunately, many creators outside the MPAA and RIAA see that the easy-to-copy property of digital media does not have to be a bad thing. Jonathan Coulton describes Creative Commons licenses, which promote copying, as being “a joy multiplier”: http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/10753.
Man, I want to see one of those for fair use…
I was convicted of genocide and all I got was this lousy movie!
Not sure if you’ve seen this one but it’s one of my favorites: