3 ms·
Society and the rules that hold it together is built on mutual trust and cooperation. In order for it to work people need to feel that those rules and social co
by belorn 3y ago
Society and the rules that hold it together is built on mutual trust and cooperation. In order for it to work people need to feel that those rules and social constructs are fair and reasonable. Morality in turn depend on people feeling that rules and social constructs are fair and reasonable.
Not paying taxes is wrong and theft. Peoples willingness to pay taxes depend on how much trust they have in government. A government that is general corrupt, do not represent the people, will result in people seeing tax collecting as wrong and theft. Not paying taxes is thus morally right and the self defense. The whole definition of right and wrong, theft, morality in general, depend on trust and the social constructs. One can not discuss morality of choice without talking about morality,
Viewing theft from a grocery shop as morally good necessitate that a person view the existence of the shop to exist outside of the social bonds and constructs of society. A modern approach to crime reduction is to increase the social support and social connections for people in high crime areas (the social part of social economic status). As is often found, harsher punishment for crime do not often reduce crime, which is partially explained by the social economic status model.
Viewing copyright violations are morally good only necessitate that a person view the current implementation of copyright to exist outside of the social bonds and constructs of society. I see maximalists of copyright as to be extremists that lives way outside of social norms. That those maximalists happen to have deep enough pockets to bribe politicians, and politicians are morally bankrupt to accept the bribes, is just that. Somewhat it is actually a simple moral choice, and those choices were wrong and made by people who should have known better.
- badcppdev 3y agoInteresting point but can you describe a more appropriate version of copyright that you would prefer to replace the corrupt one? What would you change? Is watching a pirated stream still stealing from the artists?
- belorn 3y agoThe easy boring answer would be to just do damage mitigation and return copyright to 25 years. The longer and more complex answer is to raise people to respect of copyright law. What should society expect in return for giving individuals and companies a time limited monopoly? A mandatory license given to libraries would be appreciated symbolic gesture. Different categories could also have longer or shorter duration depending on that markets needs and requirements, and government could measure the market impact that such time limited monopoly has and see if the benefits of market intervention is greater than the drawbacks (just like any other market regulation). Marketed products towards children and young adults could get additional regulated in order to reduce the differences in access to culture between the poor and rich. Such changes are however extremely unlikely to happen due to extensive overlapping international agreements that has cemented the long copyright terms of 75+ years after the author death.
- fomine3 3y agoI agree that existing copyright years is too long, but it's not a good argument for don't pay for new releases.