cm0002To yoink is to be human. You weren't using that part of your soul anyways
I disagree with that logic, but using things for non-commercial use is fine. It’s not yours, you dont own the rights to it, but you are free to borrow it for personal purposes, artistic sampling, or similar.
Nothing is owned, everything is borrowed, hoarding is immoral. Give back to your community.
IMO it should be extended to commercial use (if we keep doing commerce with things that can be copied 1:1, anyway). Of course not 1:1 copies under a different name, but there should definitely be more freedom for sampling and remix (in a general sense, not just in the context of music). The current laws are extremely restrictive. Guy in my country has been having legal battles for over two decades over sampling half a measure of drums (Pelham vs Kraftwerk).
“How do we pay artists”
What if we didn’t pay anyone? What if farmers gave crops to cooks, who cooked for the people, some of those people are artists or authors, who create art for the people. Some of the people are musicians or singers or performers who entertain the people. Some of the people are builders and lumberjacks who build shelters for the people.
I think this could scale. A government could oversee production and create jobs where needed, such as being able to have factories that produce phones that only come with what you want or need, none of the bloat or adware we get now. No new version every year, or if they do, they can pass down older versions to next generations, and recycle the oldest or broken phones.
What if everyone had a laptop to network and be digitally productive, with a reliable connection to the internet. We would be right where we are now, except everyone is thriving. They dont get to be picky, but their needs can be met.
Surely, we can figure out a way to feed artists without requiring a full-on revolution. Changing the way we pay artists is a LOT easier than doing a revolution and implementing a new system that actually has staying power.