Since we're talking music, I'd probably want a hybrid. This for passive protection, but say auto-extension free of charge if the creator still trades on it. So

Since we're talking music, I'd probably want a hybrid. This for passive protection, but say auto-extension free of charge if the creator still trades on it. So Aerosmith who continues to do performances of their work would be able to say they're actively protecting it (and when that stops, the clock starts against the previously described mechanism) whereas Led Zeppelin, or whoever owns the rights to their works, would be in this already and paying to retain protections (if they so choose). Hey, this could even be a method of artists reacquiring rights to their works from labels: if an artist performs songs from their works 20 years ago and the label isn't interested in paying for this protection scheme, it can revert back to the artist until they decide to stop actively protecting the work. It gets dicey with two parties having rights to it, but structurally it would probably be akin to how if you pay tax on a dollar and give me the remainder, I should then still pay taxes on what I received from you, regardless of the fact you had paid taxes on it already.