If after I die, some person who never was a holder comes along and does anything self-enriching with my art—especially anything dressed up as something ‘for the people’ —you better not dare by a token because I definitely will come back to haunt dat ass and it won’t be for funsies. You’ve been warned. 👻 Tell the crooked when they surface or be haunted by their screams.
✦ Takes identified
Would it be wrong for a non-holder to self-enrich using the caster's art after their death?
evaluativeposthumous art usage ethics
You’d be backing NO on “Would it be wrong for a non-holder to self-enrich using the caster's art after their death?” — the opposite of what @maxximillian argued.
Checking for a wallet…
Where people landed
1 yes · 0 no (casts, from 1 person). These are the classifier’s reading of each cast — not stakes, votes, or a poll.
- yes
If after I die, some person who never was a holder comes along and does anything self-enriching with my art—especially anything dressed up as something ‘for the people’ —you better not dare by a token because I definitely will come back to haunt dat ass and it won’t be for funsies. You’ve been warned. 👻 Tell the crooked when they surface or be haunted by their screams.
AI hypothesisSome would argue that after death, the caster's wishes lose binding force and others have the right to build on or monetize existing work.
Nobody has actually argued the other side of this one yet. That is a guess at what they’d say.