Another thing that should be improved is fighting AGAINST piracy. The government should hire more 'tracking' companies, increase fines and threaten all the uploaders. Why should we go around it if we can directly strike?! Then, the price of Blu-rays, CDs etc. should go down half in price or even more. Then there would equality between the filmmakers and the audience. Right?
Wrong. I think this is a big part of the problem with discussing the future of media - the big existing players have done a fairly good job convincing the general public that piracy is actually a big problem and that it needs to be dealt with through government action/intervention.
The price of CDs, DVDs, etc isn't high because of piracy. It's high because of a simple business concept - it always costs more to get a new customer than to sell to an existing one. The next logical step in that thought process is that it's more profitable to charge an existing customer more than to try to find a new customer at the current price. Now this has it's logical limits, of course - if you tried to charge $100 for a CD a lot of customers will just stay away. But if you raise the retail price of a CD by $0.50-$1 each year you can steadily extract more profit from the same size market - this is the exact strategy major record companies followed through the late 80's and 90's.
The problem is you can only do that as long as there isn't a comparable alternative that is significantly cheaper. As long as music & movie distribution required a significant investment in production, storage, and delivery infrastructure the only people who could compete in the market were a few big players who could then shape the market in their best interests. Piracy existed, but was a small portion of the overall market so it could be safely ignored.
In the late 90's, when the internet started becoming a practical method to distribute media, suddenly the control those big players had over distribution was threatened. The rise of online music piracy was simply an early indicator that the business model was changing - that there was a simpler, cheaper way of delivering media and customers would choose it when possible. iTunes proved that a new business model could be built on this emerging technology, but this new business model involved much lower margins on individual sales - the opposite of the previous trend towards extracting higher profits per sale. The massive infrastructure that the incumbent players have built up simply cannot be sustained in a high-volume, low-margin market where almost anyone can compete.
They're doing their best to fight this - holding licensing agreements for their existing catalogs of popular material as leverage against the startups. That's only a stalling tactic though, and it's leaving an opening into which new players can step up. Technology has made it cheaper than ever to produce high quality content, and there's a generation coming up who are used to watching original content from independent creators on youtube, etc.
There's a big difference for creators though. The old model was that many people wanted to do it professionally, and very, very few succeeded - but those who did became rich and famous. In this new emerging media world there are likely to be a lot more people who are successful, but for most it will be fairly moderate success. So the question becomes - are you looking to make films so you can be a big, famous hollywood director? Or do you just want to do it because you love making films? If it's the first choice it's as hard as it ever was, if not harder. But if it's the second option there's a better opportunity than ever to do what you love and make a living at it. The one thing that hasn't changed in either case is that it's going to be a lot of hard work, so you need to be sure that it's what you really want to do.