But we would not say "let's allow any shoe manufacturer to use the Nike swoosh, because competition is always good." There is economic value in being able to re

But we would not say "let's allow any shoe manufacturer to use the Nike swoosh, because competition is always good." There is economic value in being able to reliably identify Nike products, and the only "innovation" other firms could bring to the swoosh is to mislead customers. Copyright is like trademarks in that it is part of the brand of the firm. On the other hand, I completely agree we should own our history. For example, the purported owners of "Happy Birthday" are pure rentiers. They have no brand to protect and add no economic value. The copyright on that song should have expired long ago. I think a good compromise is "use it or lose it." A copyright expires after some period of disuse by the holder. At that point it can be said to have passed into history, and is owned by everyone.