In a New York Times op-ed piece that is so bizarre that it almost seems a Swiftian modest proposal, author Mark Helprin argues for permanent copyright, suggesting that a creative work should forever belong to heirs and not to the culture from which it was born.
He wants the government (at the expense of taxpayers) to enforce this monopoly in perpetuity, arguing that a written work is the equivalent of real estate. But he conveniently ignores the fact that real estate is taxable for the public good, while so-called "intellectual property" is not. And I shudder to imagine the legal nightmares that would ensue. Imagine Samuel Copland having to track down all the possible heirs of stray ex-Shakers to license the folk themes he hijacked for "Appalachian Spring."
Be careful what you wish for.
Perhaps "intellectual property" should be taxed. Property taxation would be one model. Another would be a value-added (oh, the irony) tax on the layers of bloodsuckers who surround artists and musicians. Such taxes would not only shift a tax burden onto the shoulders of some giant corporations, copyright farms and patent trolls, but also perhaps force some untended works into the public domain.
This is a good time to point to a video that explains current copyright laws ... in the voices of characters from the animations of the Disney Company, which of course built its empire by on the public domain world of fairy tales.
Update: Lawrence Lessig has organized a wiki-based effort to explain why Helprin is wrong.