> Published works do not lose copyright protection after five years Obviously, the courts have no control over that, but copyright protection definitely lasts

> Published works do not lose copyright protection after five years Obviously, the courts have no control over that, but copyright protection definitely lasts way too long. Five years, might be kind too short, at least for some kinds of works, but I think the longer the copyright lasts, the more harm it causes to society and the less benefit it has in protecting the interests of the creator and incentivizing more creation. > there is a “thriving ebook licensing market for libraries” in which the Publishers earn a fee whenever a library obtains one of their licensed ebooks from an aggregator like OverDrive…. This market generates at least tens of millions of dollars a year for the Publishers…. And IA supplants the Publishers’ place in this market I'm confused by this argument. If the market is thriving, then IA clearly isn't supplanting it. > IA argues that its digital lending makes it easier for patrons who live far from physical libraries to access books and that it supports research, scholarship, and cultural participation by making books widely accessible on the Internet. But these alleged benefits cannot outweigh the market harm to the Publishers…. In other words, the court values a company, which already has plenty of money, making more money, more than "patrons who live far from physical libraries" having access to books.