We also need to ask ourselves why the purveyors of cartoon animals are the wealthiest people in Western society. Is their contribution to society really that pervasive and important?<p>People will often explain this away by saying &quot;Well, people are paying for it, so they de-facto deserve it.&quot; But these people neglect that our legal structures <i>created</i> this market and necessitated that people pay. There is no natural right to intellectual property. Naturally, intellectual content cannot be protected or maintained; naturally, intellectual information is possessed in equal part by all who observe or perceive it insofar as their memory and&#x2F;or recording device allows, and all are free to share this as they see fit. IP is inexhaustible, an infinitely renewable resource. It is not a physical chunk of land that you can wall off and guard.<p>Thus, any &quot;ownership&quot; of IP is purely based in the legal grants we&#x27;ve given. And IMO, if you look at the disproportionate amount of wealth that goes to IP holders as compared to their social value, our laws need to be recalibrated. There&#x27;s no reason that a cartoon mouse should continue to print money for a company 50+ years after its original author died. That doesn&#x27;t encourage innovation.