The irony is that you wouldn't have the Hugo awards with no IP protection. The publishers wouldn't publish any of the books because there'd be no profit and the writers wouldn't write because they'd have to get jobs doing something else because the writing wouldn't pay the bills.
Why the hell should someone's creation not be protected from theft? If I write an amazing novel, why should it be ok for someone else to put their name on it and distribute it everywhere? Why shouldn't I be allowed to sell products using someone else's logo? Without IP protection, you don't have IP and you won't have any incentive for people to try and create something better. I wouldn't work years on a project only to have some jackass steal it.
There were books published before copyright existed, and would be if copyright was removed.
With only a handful of exceptions, successful writing isn't enough to make a good living under the current regime, where writers make money by having a day job. As with music, publishers who make money, not creators.
Copyright infringement isn't theft, and no amount of tough talk will make it so.
Why the hell should someone's creation not be protected from theft? If I write an amazing novel, why should it be ok for someone else to put their name on it and distribute it everywhere? Why shouldn't I be allowed to sell products using someone else's logo? Without IP protection, you don't have IP and you won't have any incentive for people to try and create something better. I wouldn't work years on a project only to have some jackass steal it.