Unpopular opinion here I know but IP protection of some description is needed under capitalism, if a corporation can just take someone's work and use it without compensating them, that's a capital-P Problem for artists. But this ain't that, HBO is not a struggling artiste who isn't being compensated for their work and Cuba isn't a for-profit enterprise using HBO's work to generate revenue. In other words this is unabashedly a good thing - the people who actually did the work have been compensated, and the Cuban people get their slop. In a better system everyone involved would like this outcome. The fact that it makes HBO executives mad only proves that they shouldn't exist.

[–] SootySootySoot@hexbear.net 17 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

I understand the intent, but needed is a strong word. The reality is that IP protection is used 1000x more frequently to screw over independent artistes than it it is used to help them. I would argue most independent artists who do make their living, do so in spite of copyright law, rather than thanks to it.

There's a hypothetical lib dream capitalist paradise out there where laws are half-thought through and applied fairly and some limited number of artists can now profit off their work thanks to IP law being 'correctly' applied. But trying to make a capitalist world where IP law actually works is like trying (and failing) to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic.