> That doesn't give anyone the right to change someone else's writings without their approval. You keep saying this, but it's not a realistic view of how publi

> That doesn't give anyone the right to change someone else's writings without their approval. You keep saying this, but it's not a realistic view of how publishing has ever worked. Entire books get posthumously published based on a few scenes or character sketches or even mutually contradictory drafts. > They don't need to be pampered Right, so this is just moralizing about what you assume readers need, not some real full-throated defense of authorial moral rights.