I think most people agree that a book author deserves a couple dollars every time someone purchases their media. JK Rowling's stories have been read and watched billions of times? Who deserves to control that capital more than JK Rowling herself?
Or at least I'd consider it to have more priority, than J.K Rowling amassing few more millions herself.
I wouldn't have such big issue with Billionaires, if there weren't so much suffering from the exploited population.
- Edited by other people - Printed by other people - (Films were) directed by other people - Characters in the films were played by other people - Distributed by other people
If there was no J.K. Rowling, we (admittedly) wouldn't have the stories. But the same is true of all of the other moving parts in the media business.
No-one is self-made.
0: https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-int...
IMO it's not reasonable at all past a certain point to continue to amass this kind of wealth that is a by-product of a broken system driven by exploitation, a system in this stage clearly set up for the rich to get richer while those struggling remain stagnant at best.
It's also not a stretch to suggest that Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates have created over 100 times more value than Rowling. Their roles are more nebulous, but they certainly did something better than their competitors. Microsoft Excel alone possibly has possibly saved trillions of hours productivity.
Under the original US Constitution, Harry Potter would be public domain by now.