You’ve all had some very interesting answers for my last post so here is a question for you, how do you think about copyright in general and should it exist?

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Why should dead people have rights that supersede those of living people? I’m all for allowing people to decide who gets their personal belongings, but I’m opposed to anything that could be considered generational wealth, because generational wealth implies generational poverty. I want societal wealth.

      • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        Generational wealth is easily tackled by an inheritance tax. If my rights and living wishes as a dead person don’t matter with regard to my property, why should some random stranger be entitled to it either?

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Who said anything about random strangers? That would just be weird. I’m suggesting something more like a 100% inheritance tax due assets beyond a certain limit.

          • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Public domain literally means “random strangers.” I don’t see why my child (or whoever else I delegate) shouldn’t be able to control the works that I make before I pass. If they did continue my works with full control, then any half-finished book or movie or game or other piece of art would torture them with legal battles and little reward. Banning inheritable copyright is a death sentence for half-finished media.

    • Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Because we’re all in one society I guess (I mean at least per country). It’s a bit like ask why can’t super rich people hoard up all the value.

      I mean why should some random humans get a head start in society, and others not?

      • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        So what do you think someone to do with everything they worked their life for?

        Are we not at least entitled to give our children a better Headstart then we had?

        Isn’t that the fucking goal?

        • Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Well yes obviously!

          Why “hoard” it? Why not give it to your kids when they are young, and thus helping them, instead of having the possibility to keep it and give it to your 59 yo child(ren)?

          • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I am giving what I can to them while I can but when I die they deserve the things I work for more than some random.

            If they want they can sell it or donate them but they are my items to do with what I please.

            If a law like that passes people will just transfer before they die and then let their “children’s assets” support them.

            • Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              I get what you’re saying, but today a minority inherits billions, many/most inherit when they’re over fifty years old.

              I mean if you have kids, of course they should have it all to help them out (with some upper limit in the hundreds of thousands IMO but that’s discussable ofc) but do tell me why the vast majority of old-timers should be the ones benefit from inheritance?