Copyright law does not fit the way musicians write music nowadays, and the result is a big danger of lawsuits over marginal accusations.

Please don't speak of "consuming" music -- listening to music does not use it up, especially if it is a digital copy that is not shackled with Digital Restrictions Management.

Also, please join me in rejecting the misleading overgeneralization, "intellectual property." I not only refuse ever to use that term, I also denounce its confusing ideas whenever they are pertinent.

Ukrainians report that Russian troops kill civilians, sometimes randomly, when they capture a village. Sometimes they shell the village persistently afterwards.

Repressive school board administrators fired a teacher for reading to children from an "inappropriate" book.

I've never seen that book, but it seems to be made of humor that is somewhat "dirty" and very childish. One might say that it is completely appropriate for children. Others say no.

This substantiates my point that "appropriate" is a subjective judgment. You can argue against a choice by saying it is "inappropriate" in your judgment, but no one should ever be criticized or punished for something so subjective and vague.

In shocking, meticulous detail, [Caroline Elkins (acclaimed American historian)] uses "lost" records from 37 former colonies to reveal the barbarity of the British empire and the hubris that fuelled it.*

*First, we did too little to oppose Russia. Now do we risk going too far the other way?*