Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
I really don't see that it's any different to the situation where, to pick an arbitrary example, I buy a house and leave it to my heirs. My heirs are benefiting from that property in precisely the same way that an author's heirs are benefiting from royalty income. Neither has done anything to earn it. Why would you make an arbitrary distinction between the two situatuon?
|
Because:
Quote:
Originally Posted by howyoudoin
The crux of the debate here is whether authors or content creators ought to be categorised as the former or the latter. I think it should be the former, since even an established business needs proper work to be out in to keep it running after the demise of the first proprietor.
|
The very existence of royalty income after death is an arbitrary imposition by the law borne of arbitrarily categorizing author earnings in the latter rather than the former.
All arguments by either side here depends on arbitrary decisions. There is no moral 'right' here that is consistent across professions.