That's precisely the crux of the problem. Is your app marketed as "free"? If it is, how can I pirate it?
It's not that I consider the word itself a troll-bait, but the misuse of it. Like other commenters already noted, there are other terms that apply to what you're complaining about. Claiming that people are "pirating" an ad-supported application seems to me like a misuse of an already widely-misused word.
On the other hand, if you're arguing that ad-supported applications should not be considered or labeled or marketed as "free", then all I can say is that dragging piracy into the discussion is not the way to support that argument. The flaw, in this case, would be in confusing the cause with effect, just like saying "It's not free because you're stealing it!"
The cause-effect relationship is exactly the point. IRL, I am an app developer. When I deliver a new app, I have two ways to monetize my development time: I can either charge money for the app (and call it the "Pro" version), or I can put ads in the app (and call it "Lite"). If someone ends up with a copy of the app that they did not pay money for (Pro) and does not show my ads (Lite), that is pirating. Whether you stole a copy of the "Pro" version or circumvented the trust I placed in the OS (to make the internet available for ad delivery whenever feasible) does not change the fact that you have broken our (admittedly loose) agreement and stolen my software from me.
I agree that it is entirely possible for the user see no ads in the Lite version anyway, perhaps because they actually don't have an internet connection. Similarly, it is entirely possible for Paypal to make some mistake and fail to credit my account properly for a purchase of the Pro version. My advertisers might by paying by click-through rather than views, in which case I am operating on a statistical basis and not making any money off of many of my users. Those details do not change the ethics and do not cancel out the wrongness of pirating.
(@chc suggests that I should say "morally wrong" instead of "pirating". I think that sounds kinda ad hominem, so I've stuck with "pirating".)
By this logic, muting TV commercials is also piracy.
circumvented the trust I placed in the OS (to make the internet available for ad delivery whenever feasible)
That's not something you can or should be able to "trust" the OS to do. It's not your hardware. If you don't want "pirates" running your app, then have it refuse to run unless it can download ads. Don't pretend you have any right to dictate whether the user is allowed to disable Internet access.
It's not that I consider the word itself a troll-bait, but the misuse of it. Like other commenters already noted, there are other terms that apply to what you're complaining about. Claiming that people are "pirating" an ad-supported application seems to me like a misuse of an already widely-misused word.
On the other hand, if you're arguing that ad-supported applications should not be considered or labeled or marketed as "free", then all I can say is that dragging piracy into the discussion is not the way to support that argument. The flaw, in this case, would be in confusing the cause with effect, just like saying "It's not free because you're stealing it!"