> decades of copyright maximalists downplaying or ignoring our valid concerns by insisting that if they didn't get everything they wanted, they would take their

> decades of copyright maximalists downplaying or ignoring our valid concerns by insisting that if they didn't get everything they wanted, they would take their toys and go home. I want them to take their toys and go home. I don't believe civilization or culture would be harmed the slightest if the small benefit of copyright enforcement (against non-commercial copying) went away. Most creators don't make a living from their work, and keep trying anyway. If they do make a living, it's usually less because the work is amazing, and more that they (or their publishers) are really good at promotion and created a compelling narrative about the work. Parallel to that, and in a tiny minority, there are a few major artists at any given time that are printing money making content that sells itself, and a few more who are making content that has enough of a niche audience that they can make a living through patreon, youtube, substack, etc. Everyone else's stuff is not that good, doesn't resonate that well, and it takes promotion to sell it. None of those paths to monetization require copyright enforcement against ordinary people sharing music or tv or movies or books with each other. If the content is good it will sell enough to make it worthwhile to produce. If it's not that good, the creator is more like a salesperson, and should get good at that, go hungry, or find a day job.