In Denmark, the “right of integrity means that even in cases where you are allowed to make use of a work, you are not allowed to change it or use it in a way or in a context that infringes the author’s literary or artistic reputation or uniqueness,” a resource for Danish researchers noted.
Infringes reputation is so sooo broad. It comes down to who does the judge like the most, no? Reddit mods will always be way down on the list, as the judicial inclined tend to be technologically illiterate.
Also, the reddit mod is not jailed. In most of europe “prison” sentences like this are conditional sentences.
Some think the law should describe illegal behaviour. And that the law should apply the same to everyone. Those people are a minority.
What happens in practice is that most people just want to be able to punish people they don’t like. So they don’t mind overly broad, generic laws, as in their mind it will only be used against the other. Especially in (former) high-trust societies.
And in practice the selective enforcement can work for a long, long time, too. Until a shift of power occurs, and the same laws are enacted just as selectively, but directed differently. Then they surprise pikachu.
Believe it or not, but there are externalities to the polemics you are describing.
The ostentatious posturing (I am a tiny minority that is virtuous, everyone else just wants to punish people and doesn’t want the law to apply to everyone equally) is pretty ignorant. I’ve lived in multiple countries across North America, Europe and Asia, it’s clear that you haven’t thought about this.
It’s comically easy to find well known (locally) examples where even the non polemical version of your arguement doesn’t hold.
EDIT: I would appreciate a counter argument from people who don’t agree. I am genuinely curious, because to me this seems like common sense. And I can provide multiple example from different cultures about why this rhetoric does not sound convincing.
I don’t think the reference to “ostentatious posturing” is uncharitable. Just look at the text. This copytext is pretty standard and clearly aimed at self-aggrandization.
Infringes reputation is so sooo broad. It comes down to who does the judge like the most, no? Reddit mods will always be way down on the list, as the judicial inclined tend to be technologically illiterate.
Also, the reddit mod is not jailed. In most of europe “prison” sentences like this are conditional sentences.
Yeah, it also seems weird cause things like remakes, parodies, trailers, etc. all would technically violate that law.
Someone once explained it to me.
Some think the law should describe illegal behaviour. And that the law should apply the same to everyone. Those people are a minority.
What happens in practice is that most people just want to be able to punish people they don’t like. So they don’t mind overly broad, generic laws, as in their mind it will only be used against the other. Especially in (former) high-trust societies.
And in practice the selective enforcement can work for a long, long time, too. Until a shift of power occurs, and the same laws are enacted just as selectively, but directed differently. Then they surprise pikachu.
Believe it or not, but there are externalities to the polemics you are describing.
The ostentatious posturing (I am a tiny minority that is virtuous, everyone else just wants to punish people and doesn’t want the law to apply to everyone equally) is pretty ignorant. I’ve lived in multiple countries across North America, Europe and Asia, it’s clear that you haven’t thought about this.
It’s comically easy to find well known (locally) examples where even the non polemical version of your arguement doesn’t hold.
EDIT: I would appreciate a counter argument from people who don’t agree. I am genuinely curious, because to me this seems like common sense. And I can provide multiple example from different cultures about why this rhetoric does not sound convincing.
I don’t think the reference to “ostentatious posturing” is uncharitable. Just look at the text. This copytext is pretty standard and clearly aimed at self-aggrandization.
Do you even know if that’s true for Denmark? It is in the US, but I doubt it is, globally.