When asked why the Times doesn’t see its job as trying to “stop Trump,” Kahn completely missed the point and said journalism’s role is to provide “impartial information” rather than becoming a “propaganda arm.”

That’s pretty rich when you read any of the New York Times’ coverage of countries that are America’s geopolitical enemies. Their articles practically read like State Department press releases.

I haven’t done any serious programming in a long time. Is this mostly about corporate process and hierarchies for programming or does this apply to open source projects as well?

Seems really demoralizing putting in the work to add something to an open source project and having it waste away unreviewed and unappreciated.

So IP law for individuals = bad, but IP law for corporations = good is the general argument here?

Is there a principled basis for this argument?

It seems like a lot of art like musicians or novelists rely almost entirely on earnings from selling their works to individuals. Wouldn’t a legal regime like you’re advocating basically make producing art for real people a lot less lucrative comparatively and drive those artists into making corporate art and marketing materials?

So what you’re saying is this episode has caused you/others here on /c/piracy to rethink your prior beliefs, and now you see some value in the copyright legal regime?

Conveniently, these moral arguments that are freed from the confines of discrete logic also allow people on /c/piracy to ignore the rules when justifying their own piracy, and still condemn others they already happen to dislike when they do piracy.

Lemmy sure loves copyright and intellectual property once you change who the pirate is.