This is exactly the thought trap I was talking about. Your analysis solely focuses on the creator, but leaves out the rights of the consumer. You view copyright

This is exactly the thought trap I was talking about. Your analysis solely focuses on the creator, but leaves out the rights of the consumer. You view copyright as a moral right (it being "not cool" to violate it), but forget to consider that it is first and foremost an economic tool. Remember that copyright is a temporary monopoly granted by the government; a compromise to incentivise creators to ultimately benefit the public. The public's needs should come first, and only restricted when required for limited purposes, e.g. incentives. And I believe it is in the public's interest for data to be readily analysed and remixed, no matter what the creators want, with restrictions only there to allow things like paywalls and (actually) purchasing digital media.