Am I misunderstanding something here??? Copyright needn’t exist under socialism because under socialism artists wouldn’t be dependent on the legal fiction of “intellectual property” to make a living.
Without copyright, what LLMs raiding the creative output of whoever (including by destroying and scanning books), and reproducing it, even exactly, wouldn’t have any legal restrictions, but neither would overt piracy.
It would be a very different world. So, depending on what you think is “wrong” with one of the listed activities but not the other, it might be solved by eliminating IP (as part of overthrowing Capitalism or otherwise). Also, the current private justifications of those behaviors would no longer acquiring or obtaining capital, but that doesn’t mean people wouldn’t pursue those behaviors for other justifications.
I think in a socialist world, a great many artists will still find themselves working to make a living; they will work for the community instead of the Capitalists, but there will still be work to be done, and art may not keep your belly full in lean times. But, I also have problems imagining a socialist world.
Now you have upgraded to a more limited number of rich assholes with even more concentrated power. Oh wait, a couple of decades later they reintroduce capitalism too.
It’s unclear that is inevitable, but it does seem to be a common result of State socialism.
In libertarian socialism, hoarding resources will be recognized as an attack on the commons that can be answered with an attack (by the people) on the hoarder.
In libertarian socialism, the people are the police. There’s no States, so no state-organized and state-privileged police force. I could be wrong though, I still need a lot of education around libertarian socialism; I’m very much used to Capitalism.
Simply put, if people impose themselves by force on others then “they will be the government” and “we will oppose them with force” for “if today we want to make a revolution against the government, it is not in order to submit ourselves supinely to new oppressors.” [Malatesta, Op. Cit., p. 99] This applies to defending a free society against organised counter-revolution and against those within it conducting anti-social (“criminal”) activities. The principle is the same, it is just the scale which is different.
The “bunch of vigilantes” will be accountable to the people because they will be the people. They will act to reject anti-social activities, re-educate people that chose to do anti-social acts (so they have a pro-social understanding), and remediate any harms due anti-social activities.
remember folks: the entire problem is capitalism. it can literally all be solved by dismantling capitalism and …undismantling some guillotines.
Do you think that under State socialism that copyrights will exist and be enforced?
Who/what exactly would grant OR enforce copyrights under libertarian socialism?
Capitalism is a problem, but is not quite parallel with IP rights/protections.
Am I misunderstanding something here??? Copyright needn’t exist under socialism because under socialism artists wouldn’t be dependent on the legal fiction of “intellectual property” to make a living.
Without copyright, what LLMs raiding the creative output of whoever (including by destroying and scanning books), and reproducing it, even exactly, wouldn’t have any legal restrictions, but neither would overt piracy.
It would be a very different world. So, depending on what you think is “wrong” with one of the listed activities but not the other, it might be solved by eliminating IP (as part of overthrowing Capitalism or otherwise). Also, the current private justifications of those behaviors would no longer acquiring or obtaining capital, but that doesn’t mean people wouldn’t pursue those behaviors for other justifications.
I think in a socialist world, a great many artists will still find themselves working to make a living; they will work for the community instead of the Capitalists, but there will still be work to be done, and art may not keep your belly full in lean times. But, I also have problems imagining a socialist world.
i think also state socialism would be a problem, yes.
Now you have upgraded to a more limited number of rich assholes with even more concentrated power. Oh wait, a couple of decades later they reintroduce capitalism too.
It’s unclear that is inevitable, but it does seem to be a common result of State socialism.
In libertarian socialism, hoarding resources will be recognized as an attack on the commons that can be answered with an attack (by the people) on the hoarder.
How in the world is that going to be policed?
In libertarian socialism, the people are the police. There’s no States, so no state-organized and state-privileged police force. I could be wrong though, I still need a lot of education around libertarian socialism; I’m very much used to Capitalism.
That makes no sense. How are a bunch of vigilantes going to be accountable to the rest of society?
Maybe this will help: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-anarchist-faq-editorial-collective-an-anarchist-faq-full#text-amuse-label-seci58
I haven’t internalized all of it yet.
I think this is the most direct answer:
The “bunch of vigilantes” will be accountable to the people because they will be the people. They will act to reject anti-social activities, re-educate people that chose to do anti-social acts (so they have a pro-social understanding), and remediate any harms due anti-social activities.
The police, right now, are the people. The state is the people.
No, police and the State are not the people. They are given authority and privilege that the people don’t have, in particular qualified immunity.