Remote Proctoring deemed illegal as violation of 4th amendment rights?

[LevelUP]

So I don't think that we should go back in history and cancel previously made books or movies.

No need to say anything. If you agree, then thumbs up to this post.

Your reader can't know if they agree or disagree if they don't know what you mean by "cancel."

Are you proposing something to change the longstanding fact that some commercial media becomes less available over time? Most books first published in 1937 like And to Think... or 1955 like Lolita are now scarce and hard to find and often expensive. There are exceptions like Lolita. But as time goes by increasingly many of those exceptions drop off and join the majority of titles that are scarce. Occasionally older works experience revivals in interest. Many will never experience such revivals. How many 1937 and even 1955 books, movies, and songs will ever be on your playlists?

The market for media changes and commercial publishers respond to changing interests. Digitization has revived some old media, but with limits. There's plenty of media that was available online years ago that's no longer now. Eventually media enters the public domain which makes it more available.

You are correct. There are market forces involved. (updated cancel meaning)

What often happens is the publisher has an extensive catalog of titles. A smear campaign is launched against specific titles a publisher has.

Now the dilemma is, do you fight the smear campaign and risk people boycotting your entire catalog?

Or do you give in, take some titles off the market and save the majority of revenue from the titles that are not under attack? 

Here is a piece titled "Why it's time to cancel Quentin Tarantino."

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/ju...-hollywood