>>38
One of my essential problems with his idea is that (to my understanding) he wants to give popular artists the primary cut while less popular artists get much less of a cut. I understand where he's going with it (good art changes the world, and all that) but this necessarily regulates that all art has to be "good" . Also, what if I don't like a song (let's take soulja boi), yet it's so fucking popular with a majority that I'M PAYING FOR IT. What if it's popular, for say, 13 years. That's 13 YEARS OF MY TAX MONEY DOWN THE FUCKING DRAIN FOR A SONG THAT I CAN CARE LESS ABOUT. More so, who's to say foul play can't take it's hand upon popularity. Popular art isn't always good art.
I could go on about it... But probably the most essential point I should stress is this. Richard Stallman, a man who promotes freedom, is trying to stress a TAX (the very ideal devoid of ALL liberties because you HAVE to pay it) on artistic endeavors. Not a good fucking idea.