Unbelievable is the level of comment on HN. Let's see, the law: 1. Aim to make available orphaned work. 2. Only applies to work unpublished for at least 5 year

Unbelievable is the level of comment on HN. Let's see, the law: 1. Aim to make available orphaned work. 2. Only applies to work unpublished for at least 5 years. 3. The public publishing right can be revoked by the author or publisher. 4. The author is getting royalties. 5. There is no censoring. Let's compare to another somewhat related case of royalties land grab, iPhone publishing: 1. Aim to control and profit from other people work. 2. Applies to all iPhone published work from day one. 3. There is no alternative other than not publish your iPhone app. 4. Apple gets a cut, always. 5. Apple gets to decide what gets published or not, unilaterally. It's funny also to compare this to, say, how the music radio system works. Hey, it's compulsory diffusion of work without the author consent with a government-prescribed royalty payment system. For current works. Ah, but music radio stations are mostly privately owned, so this all right? All in all, the law is reasonable and makes a honest attempt to leave the author in control. I could even envision that small and amateur author would want their work exclusively distributed by such a system, if the royalties are fair.