OP> Copyright terms have been radically extended in this country largely to keep pace with Europe, Over the decades, I've talked with at least one government-s

OP> Copyright terms have been radically extended in this country largely to keep pace with Europe, Over the decades, I've talked with at least one government-side principal of the negotiation which resulted in the 1976 extension act. They reported knowing the act was bad public policy, but considered themselves engaged in damage control. Because of Disney's political might, and the "crazy" policies being sought. They considered the act a success - as public interest damage control. I can't speak to the 1998 extension. My now vague impression is "no one" thought it was a good idea, simply an exercise in brute force political power. So one possibility is the author James Somers is simply being clueless. The closest I can come to an alternative is this: the increased regulatory capture of the last three decades, and the long-term narrative of reconciling with European law, might hypothetically have created some institutional momentum independent of the prime mover's financial interests. I don't see it for 1998, but maybe for the upcoming copyright extension. But this is a stretch. I think he just got suckered - it seems to happen to a lot of journalists doing drive-by reporting on the area. Sidebar, a life lesson: When people ask you to keep information confidential, ask them for how long - how many years or decades. It becomes a long-term irritant, not being able to garbage collect such restrictions.