> why is the creator not entitled to protect it as an asset for as long as people value it? That masks the fact that IP laws are a form of regulatory capture.

> why is the creator not entitled to protect it as an asset for as long as people value it? That masks the fact that IP laws are a form of regulatory capture. The original deal was to gain exclusive ownership _for a limited time_ at the cost of disclosure and understanding that it would eventually enter the public domain. Fun fact, before trademark laws were enforced, baggage makers like Louis Vuitton just increased the quality of their stitching / logograms in order to differentiate themselves. In fact the modern LV prints are a result of this process of trying to make his goods too expensive to counterfeit. Now luxury brands can stamp on inferior quality materials and sell just as well. There's no competitive force to increase quality anymore, these brands can just put their logos on decent-but-not-top-end materials.