[jdksmdbtbdnmsm]

Copyright law is a nearly perfect conflict in capitalism because profit by way of merely owning capital also has no moral or logical basis. Legitimation of such a system requires extreme propaganda, and the propagandized then read such nonsense back into things like copyright.

>Really opened my eyes on how much of the law is a compromise between interests and not some argument based on morals or righteous principle.

This applies not only to copyright law, but almost every single aspect of civil existence, and increasingly moreso every day.

[wakawaka28]

What are you talking about? Copyright was created to solve real problems for people who create things. Patents too. We could argue how much protection people should get but at the end of the day it makes sense that the people who put in work need to get paid.

>profit by way of merely owning capital also has no moral or logical basis

Speaking of propaganda, do you hear yourself? I get what you're saying but in practice there is rarely such a thing. Most of the cases that anti-capitalist types point to are not real "something for nothing" scenarios. The two that stand out are loans and IP. If you own IP, then you have to expend money creating, acquiring, defending, implementing, and selling it (repeat for all attempts to make something that do not lead to profit, which are basically R&D). If you loan money to people, you are deprived of that money and put it at risk at the same time. All of these are services to society that demand compensation, at least if what you're offering up is worth it to people.

In the real world, advocating for pay without work is advocating for slavery. Work must always be done, and if it is so pleasant that it demands no compensation, then it isn't work. The trouble most people have is they only see results and they don't see the work and investment it took to get those results.