This brings up a point I often ponder: should the records of horrific criminals be cancelled? Consider the two extremes:
A) artist is never played again, no more royalties are paid. Nobody gets to enjoy the music.
B) the artist's estate is sold to a victims compensation trust, that collects, say, $4m/year that gets distributed to victims and charities. You still hear their song occasionally on the radio and gradually forget about their plight over the years.
A) artist is never played again, no more royalties are paid. Nobody gets to enjoy the music.
B) the artist's estate is sold to a victims compensation trust, that collects, say, $4m/year that gets distributed to victims and charities. You still hear their song occasionally on the radio and gradually forget about their plight over the years.
Which one brings the victims closer to justice?