The differences between the movie industry and the music industry are too great, I think, to really say they're analogous. I for one firmly believe that if it was as easy and satisfying to steal movies as it is to steal music, the movie industry would be in just as much trouble (if not more).
As far as easy goes, songs are much smaller to upload and transfer. The smaller size means you can download more of them quickly and leave less of a footprint for the authorities to follow. A decent quality movie today is several GB, where an MP3 will be around 10 MB; that means you can literally download hundreds of songs in the time it takes you to get one movie. For a long time movies were simply too big for anyone to download and pirate because connections didn't support the transfer of that much data. There's always been a lot more songs out there for pirates to grab because of this, whereas there are some movies that you simply can't find on the net.
And for satisfying, even if you do manage to steal a movie, if it's a new recently it's a poorly done bootleg camera job with terrible sound and lighting effects. Sometimes a DVD quality rip will be leaked early, but that happens rarely. So generally speaking while a movie is in the theater you have no choice but to go and see it if you want a decent experience. Even if you could get a DVD quality rip, it's still a more satisfying experience in the theater because the sound and visuals are of a higher quality.
Although it doesn't line up perfectly, I think music piracy is a closer comparison to the video gaming industry. PC gaming is in major decline right now because it's just not that profitable with the amount of piracy going on. You notice a lot of classically PC-only studios beginning development for consoles and doing multi-platform launches and putting no extra effort into the PC versions (oftentimes simply porting them as in the case of Borderlands).
PC games simply aren't that great of an investment anymore without some serious Digital Rights Management, and in every case where they attempt to implement them (other than steam possibly, people seem to like that) there are a ton of complaints. Ubisoft is getting slammed right now over their latest which requires a user to stay connected to the internet while playing to feed them data.
A lot of people are speculating that PC gaming is going to continue to decline and the signs are clearly there. Many PC conventions are being done away with by publishers to save money (dedicated servers) and some games that were supposed to come out for the PC are being made console only (Alan Wake).
Sometimes it's not the company's fault. We like to pretend we live in a world where anything and everything can be anticipated and we blame the victim (when the victim is impersonal enough to accept it anyway, such as a corporation) for failing to keep up. But lets face it, no one saw the internet coming, no one saw P2P coming, the MP3 Codec, or Torrents. Technology has been highly unpredictable.
It's true that the music industry was drunk on wealth and power before the internet knocked them down or a peg or two, but in order to adapt to the changing times, they would've had to make drastic changes. People needed to be fired, wages had to be cut across the board, and they needed to do drastic restructuring. It's no wonder that they didn't want to adapt and instead wanted to go after those responsible for their decline as forcefully as they could.
Was it right...? No. Was it wrong...? No, possibly, maybe.
The real culprit is the freedom and lack of consequences that the internet grants. In many ways this is a good thing, but the net has given us all an amazing amount of power and anonymity with very little responsibility. Unfortunately, there's going to be casualties; no technological advancement is without a downside.