Here's a table I adapted from Louis Rossman's video on the levels of piracy, grey areas and his morals and ethics on it. (spreadsheet file)
I tried to condense each rank and make it less about a specific type of media like CD audio or DVD video, along with a table of simplified characteristics of each situation. Of course more levels can be added and there are many situations not covered. This hierarchy is simply the way Louis ordered it from more to less justifiable; he respects people can think about it differently and I do too. He suggests that he doesn't really care about people that pirate without giving a shit about creators, and that he only has a problem with people who aren't honest with themselves about their motivations.
Setting legality aside, what 'level of piracy' is morally or ethically acceptable to you?
The colours have only partial relevance to whether it's more or less ethical in the context of piracy. The colours signify more what is better for that category specifically. Having no DRM is better than not, supporting a creator is better than not, having it availble to buy or rent is better than having it discontinued, as a few examples.
Green = Good for that category, Red = Bad, Yellow = Mixed, Grey = Not good nor bad.
According to whom? For example the premise of the last question is "I want free shit and don't care about the creator". So how is "not putting money forward" a negative? It's the core of the outcome I wanted.
I totally understand that. But the colouring is for the category column and not in the context of the situation row, and since the column is about putting money forward or not, Yes is positive and No is negative.