The same could be said for the show that is being discussed in the parent comment. I would hope you see my point by now but I’m going to guess you don’t.
Capitalists own assets for a living and extract labor value in the form of profit. In this case, the intellectual property.
Laborers actually do the work to create the product.
You do not need someone else to own the art for it to be created. You do need labor for it to be created. Hope that clears it up for ya.
Except laborers are also capitalists. I’m a laborer, and trust me when I say there’s plenty of people here on Lemmy who think I’m a dirty fucking useless capitalist because I need to spend money to survive, or chose to purchase a luxury, or offset my labor by requesting compensation in money form from another person.
90,000 different definitions here on Lemmy of what people think capitalism is and what a capitalist is, I’m weary at this point from all the disparate ideas of what this notion even is. It’s ludicrous. It doesn’t matter to people what it ACTUALLY MEANS becuase its become a sudonym for people hatred of money in general (which I share).
So no, you don’t get to have a world where somebody drew a comic for fun and profited off of it, but that’s somehow NOT capitalism, then somehow when Netflix making a live show, is 100% different and suddenly capitalism. It’s fucking stupid to even suggest. They are both capitalists. Even if the artist is not the IP holder, they have been a cog in the system which holds the IP regardless and as such are constituent.
