4 ms·
This kind of thing requires a teleological analysis. Is it really so bad for a children’s book to serve as a perpetual annuity for a children’s hospital? It cer
by User23 3y ago
This kind of thing requires a teleological analysis. Is it really so bad for a children’s book to serve as a perpetual annuity for a children’s hospital? It certainly serves the public purpose better than a certain mouse empire that’s dictated US copyright law from its quasisovereign territory in central Florida for the better part of a century. Should we morally lump them together?
- Affric 3y agoNo, can you see? It would be far better for the copyright system to exist wholly designed for profit and us fighting to destroy it rather than one part of the system being designed to benefit a children’s hospital and us still fighting to destroy the whole system! Anything less is copyright realism!
- gbear605 3y agoIf the hospital needs to be funded, then the British government should properly fund it, based on a progressive tax code. If the hospital doesn’t need the funding from the royalties, then it’s a meaningless regressive tax that, if anything, harms children to some amount, since they can’t enjoy any works that would have otherwise been freely created but can’t be. Disney is certainly morally much worse than a children’s hospital, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t criticize the hospital. And I doubt the comments here are hurting the hospital in any way, for that matter.