Quote - I believe you're wrong on the fraud aspect, gate.  Far as I know, the purchaser of infringing content can't be held responsible for its use within the terms of use/license agreement which comes with the product.

Such a use is almost certainly not willful infringement, but the person who uses copyrighted material thinking they had a license, when they didn't, can still be liable for actual damages to the holder of copyright. Copyright infringement, at heart, is a tort of strict liability. (What lawyers call "mens rea" and what normal people call "intent" or "motive" is not required, save the intent to actually use the material.) They won't get damage multipliers and they probably won't get costs and fees, but the holder of copyright can get damages.

Example, although this is based on the right of publicity, not copyright: Model signs contract with agency giving it the right to release his right of publicity to clients under certain conditions. Model poses for product label photograph. Agency signs release to Manufacturer which gives more release than Agency had to give. Manufacturer uses Model's likeness on product label for many years before Model, completely by accident, finds out about it, and sues. Manufacturer claims defense of release. Result: Release was not valid because party who signed it had no authority to do so. Model wins.

This really happened and the model was awarded millions of dollars in damages. There's a lot more to it than this and I've oversimplified the reason that the release was no good, but that's the jist of it. Same thing can happen in copyright.

Again, not legal advice, consult a lawyer with respect to any actual and specific questions.