removing copyright entirely would benefit society

I could be convinced of that.

I think extreme reform would be of more benefit. Copyright as-is is an active harm.

Copyright IS about protecting creators

No, it isn’t. The intent WAS to “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts”. The reality IS that it harms society, by benefiting only the already powerful.

I believe that the protection copyright provides is proportionate to how much you can spend on lawyers. So, no protection for the smallest creators, and little protection for smaller creators against larger corporations.

I support extreme copyright reform, though I doubt it should be completely removed.

The reason copyright exists is for the same reason patents do: to protect the little guy.

If you actually believe this is still true, I’ve got a bridge to sell ya’.

This hasn’t been true since the '70s, at the latest.

This more closely aligns with my perspective, although I also believe no work should be able to be covered by both copyright and patent (e.g. software).

I’m even willing to give longer terms as long as they are limited by the lifespan of the living sentient creator, and not subject to legal games around corporate personhood.

But, I can certainly see the motivations behind eliminating copyright entirely.

Interesting take. I’m not opposed, but I feel like the necessary reverse engineering skill base won’t ramp up enough to deal with SAS and holomorphic encryption. So, in a world without copyright, you might be able to analog hole whatever non-interactibe media you want, but software piracy will be rendered impossible at the end of the escalation of hostilities.

Copyright is an unnatural, authoritarian-imposed monopoly. I doubt it will last forever.