> I would argue that it should only apply to businesses and inheritors, so that an author could still behest his IP as a worthy inheritance. I see that I didn'

> I would argue that it should only apply to businesses and inheritors, so that an author could still behest his IP as a worthy inheritance. I see that I didn't write clearly what I meant to write, which was 35 years after the original copyright-holder's death. > After all, it wouldn't be fair to tell a company they have to find an extra $22b per year from next January. Copyright laws have already been changed with retroactive effect, so it's not as though any troublesome precedent would be set in that area.