If the structures and systems that you put into place are used for inequitable purposes, then the entire system is inequitable as it does not compensate the victims at the benefit of the existing beneficiaries
For example the Catholic Church and everyone associated with it is complicit and benefits from child sex abuse.
Sex abuse benefits priests, and the staff and congregation support the priests. So the existence of the Catholic church, so long as they are passively or ignorantly complicit in victimizing congregants is inequitable and therefore everything that they do inherits the complicity
Same with Cosby, he built a structure of abuse that allowed him to continue his rise to fame. Anything he did concurrently should be rightly torched and destroyed as it was misappropriated - the viewers etc did not know about that and would not have supported it had they known it
No, Bill Cosby was the executive producer, and leader for the entirety of all of his properties so any structures that set up would be implicated any of it.
This is one of those cases where it maps directly one to one because personality was the marketing factor, much like with other name brand celebrities. If the benefits that you have received monetarily are a function of a personality portrayal and expectation of behavioral coherence from the audience then this is misappropriated value.
The only argument you can make is one that is cynical, and assumes that we shouldn’t trust anybody for anything ever, and therefore all externalities have been priced into the exchange between the consumer and the producer.
Looks like people are really triggered by the idea of equity