| ▲ | kstrauser 5 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
Retail businesses pay property taxes to support that. I fully support copyright enforcement being funded by intellectual property taxes: * You declare your property’s worth. * You pay IP taxes on that worth. * You cannot sure for recovery of more than that worth, total. If you have a song worth $1M, and sue 2 people for $500K, then consider it sold. If someone steals a car from you, you can’t collect its full worth each from multiple thieves. And if you have a $1B film, you can’t sue for $1B if you’re only paying taxes on $1M. Why are your and my taxes subsidizing theft from the public domain? Let them pay for it, just like our property taxes pay for roads and schools and fire departments and police. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | tacticalturtle 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> Retail businesses pay property taxes to support that. But they don’t? Copyright infringement is a federal crime - your property taxes don’t fund that. The income tax that we all pay, including the IP holders, do the funding. Additionally retail theft, at least in my jurisdiction of Massachusetts is prosecuted by the state - my income taxes fund that, not property taxes. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | kube-system 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Criminal cases aren't a substitute for civil suits, not for copyright... or for any other type of loss. People generally do have to pay their own way to bring a civil case to recover for damages in a copyright infringement case... or any kind of case. The fines/jail time typically ascribed by a criminal case do not go into a victims bank account. A criminal case is between the government prosecutor and the defendant. The copyright holder wouldn't even be a party to the case. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
| [deleted] | |||||||||||||||||