> ... and on the other freetards that don't provide a realistic revenue model for artists. Gee, I didn't know this "intellectual property" war has gone this fa

> ... and on the other freetards that don't provide a realistic revenue model for artists. Gee, I didn't know this "intellectual property" war has gone this far! Is it now a crime not to provide a realistic revenue model for artists? Just in case it's actually true (I haven't been following the news recently) I am hereby providing a realistic revenue model for artists: get a job. No, really. I don't believe that being an artist (or an author in general) entitles you to anything. Copyright is a privilege, not a god-given right. Its original purpose was to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts", a social contract designed to provide fair compensation for contributing to the public pool of ideas. Then the suits came and fucked this up with their concept of intellectual "property" and perpetual copyright term extensions. Copyright doesn't serve its original purpose anymore, we should just drop it. If you don't like it, don't publish. It had been this way for most of human history and it worked fine.