Why would people author published works if they won’t get compensated? Countries with weak copyright enforcement don’t tend to have better output than the US (I think most would argue it’s worse).

I do agree the term is too long, I would support something in the range of 5-20 years.

> the quality and quantity of published work will increase.

I know the argument from the late 1700s that having copyright wouldn't necessarily lead to higher quality works of literature, music, etc.

But I've never heard the argument that getting rid of copyright would actually lead to higher quality published works. What's the evidence or even reasoning for that claim here in 2026?

Edit: added here in 2026 because, on reflection, I'm not asking about historical arguments; though they may be interesting, I'm curious about what's relevant in the time of social media and LLMs.

Copyright term kept getting extended. Copyright was a controversial concept when it got baked into the US constitution. But the enabling laws have run off the rails, mainly due to corporate lobbying. Copyright has also been reinterpreted as a property right, when it's really a government granted limited term monopoly. Another case of the government being bought out from under the people.