I am certainly against the continual copyright extensions where things now need to be almost a century old before they enter the public domain (at least in the

I am certainly against the continual copyright extensions where things now need to be almost a century old before they enter the public domain (at least in the US), but limited copyright has purpose -- it created the possibility of professional authors, for example. In ancient times the Romans who wrote things were almost entirely noblemen who did it as a hobby and didn't need to support themselves. And the Middle Ages a lot of authors were monks who were likewise supported by their monasteries. But in the early modern era authors were able (through copyright) to make a living doing that. And things like invention of the novel as we know it are from this period. Going back to life + 25 or life + 50 would still allow authors to make money, support their loved ones after their death, and still put things into the public domain while they are still more culturally relevant. Obviously, publishers wouldn't like that of course.