I think it should be for a lifetime of the original author and non-transferable. The system is already rigged very much against artists, it's amazing how many people still contribute to culture under the given conditions. I don't see any reason why someone who writes a Christmas song or a novel shouldn't have a possibility to get payments for their works until they die, for example. However, I have a lot of problems with the bizarre extensions that companies and heirs have gotten for work they haven't created on their own.

▲

chii a day ago | parent [-]

> non-transferable

so you can't create works for hire than?

▲

Peritract 19 hours ago | parent [-]

You could, you'd just license them at creation time for X years. It would stop large corporations hoarding everything.

▲

chii 17 hours ago | parent [-]

a licensing agreement is not work for hire - work for hire means the person doing the hiring owns the copyright, not the person who did the work.

	▲	Peritract 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's how it works now, but we're talking about changing it. That's the context of the conversation.