this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2026
241 points (98.0% liked)
Asklemmy
54152 readers
534 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Passive income. If value is being created and you're being presented some of it without doing any work it necessarily means that someone else isn't receiving the full value of the work they're doing.
In most cases I agree with you, but what about a musician who makes passive income off of people streaming their music, or people who buy my fonts?
Cap it at the original 28 years after creation. The current 70 years after the creator's death is ridiculous.
Even 15 years is a lot of money for something you most likely spent under 6 months creating. Of course, we could always have a detailed system and not just one flat time frame.
I think people overestimate how much the average creator can get from their work over time. They need to keep creating to maintain a livable income. Also, 28 years is a good number because it prevents mega corporations from stealing from small creators. Imagine if some novel series becomes a big hit, but Disney or Warner Brothers could just adapt it whenever they pleased without paying the author.
Why should you be paid in perpetuity for work you did once? I'd love it if someone paid me residules for the work I did today making widgets.
But how should a singer who produces an album, or an author who writes a book, or whatever be compensated? Its popularity isn't really known until after it's published, it's not really fair for a damn good writer to get paid the same as someone who produces slop.
Not passive income, they did the work of creating the music or the font
Doesent all passive income require some upfront work outside of investing?
No, that's what makes it passive. Having money isn't a job, investing isn't work it's gambling and extremely rigged.
If you inherit/"born rich" I don't think so...