I think realistically, the thing that breaks the music industry's back isn't piracy. It never was. The real culprit is something quieter and harder to litigate against.
For context: when Napster got shut down in 2001, the industry celebrated. They'd won. Except revenue kept falling anyway, straight through the 2000s, through iTunes, through legal downloads, through all the solutions they'd fought for. The piracy argument was always a little too convenient — it gave the industry a villain to sue instead of a structural shift to reckon with.
The structural shift was this: music became ambient. Background. Infrastructure. Something that plays while you do something else.
Streaming finished what mp3s started. Not by stealing music but by training an entire generation to expect it everywhere, frictionlessly, for almost nothing per listen. Spotify pays rights holders somewhere between $0.003 and $0.005 per stream. The maths only work at a scale that maybe a hundred artists on the planet can achieve. Everyone else is treading water and calling it exposure.
Now look at what's happening to writing. And visual art. And soon, probably, a lot of other things people used to be paid to make.
The threat isn't that AI is stealing work, exactly. The threat is that it's making creative output ambient. Functional. Background noise that costs almost nothing to generate and therefore becomes worth almost nothing to pay for. You can argue about copyright law all you want. The industry fought piracy in court for a decade and won every case, but lost the war anyway.
I don't think this one ends differently.