To be clear, there is a legitimate purpose to copyright. .. Copyright ensures that there is sufficient incentive for content producers to develop content, but there is a steep cost to our unusually long copyright period that Congress has now created. Our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution with explicit instructions on this matter for a limited copyright – not an indefinite monopoly. . .It is difficult to argue that the life of the author plus 70 years is an appropriate copyright term for this purpose – what possible new incentive was given to the content producer for content protection for a term of life plus 70 years vs. a term of life plus 50 years? Where we have reached a point of such diminishing returns we must be especially aware of the known and predictable impact upon the greater market that these policies have held. . .

"America’s founders thought that innovators needed to earn an economic return for their efforts and be protected temporarily from imitation. But over the years, copyright and patent law has evolved into cronyist protection of the revenue streams of powerful incumbent companies—a type of regulation that hampers innovation and entrepreneurship. . . At the nation’s birth, copyright was granted for a term of fourteen years with the option for one additional term of equal length. So the traditional American approach is one of short copyright terms. Today, thanks to effective entertainment industry lobbying, copyright exists for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years."