If you persist to the point that you get arrested, thats due to your taking something that was not yours and trying to profit from it.
Don't confuse copying with taking. If I copy your hairstyle, I haven't taken anything from you. You don't suddenly become bald. The only thing you don't have is the ability to profit but that was never something you owned anyways. The fact you can profit off of something is a function of everyone else valuing what you have to offer. You aren't owed a profit just because you feel that way.
If IBM had not the exclusive right to resell that technology since the 1960s, there never would have been a computer revolution.
Can you prove that computers wouldn't have existed anyways or in even a better form than they currently do? I don't see how you can. I think your statement is without merit.
No-one can prove a negative. It says a lot that you are relying on a logical fallacy.
Your view seems to be that you do like the outcome of research, be it computers or medicines, and that there is no need to have an incentive for people to do it. Researchers costs money - someone has to pay the salaries of all staff in laboratories while research is being done. That's why a new drug costs about $800 million to develop. If you don't allow the investor to make a profit, there will be no new drugs. Unless you have some better way for for the researchers salaries to be paid while they do their years of work?