TBH, it's probably better to create a post scarcity society where a living isn't dependent on holding something hostage. Some variation of a basic income, that would support artists to create. But we don't have to go that far to say, copyright as it stands now is over-mighty and should have its claws harshly trimmed.
I'm not saying it's right, but it should be pointed out that it can still work.
China has structured their society to operate without much copyright enforcement.
It should make people think about what kind of society they want.
I live in China and I’d say it’s plausible that people watch more Japanese, Korean and Anglophone media than Chinese, dubbed and subtitled. I wouldn’t bet on it but it’s at least 30%. Chinese tv and movies are dreadful.
(I dont know the difference between mandarin and cantonese so sorry if im wrong)
Then: The rights of the content creators to make a living.
Not the other way around.
At least in the US, that is not the purpose of copyright. The constitution lays out why congress has the power to grant copyrights and patents:
> To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries