Gregory's ServerEven if artists were not allowed to sell their rights, however, I'm still not sure about them having unlimited or indefinite rights, particularly if there's no profit motive involved.
I see all this more in terms of society coming to a sensible compromise that acknowledges the artist's work, and perhaps to a share of profits for a time from derivative works, but also acknowledges the social nature of all art, that it builds on previous works and traditions, and that allowing experiment and creativity in the public domain is good for everyone.
@GeofCox @CStamp @duncanlock lots of people submit their works directly into public domain, or a similar sharing license. Thomas Jefferson setup the basis of the current copyright/patent regime - at first with 7 years to recoup the costs of creation, bumped up to 14 years, before a work enters the public domain - Jefferson also said “He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lites his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.” and that "these monopolies produce more embarrassment than advantage to society" ... The idea that an authors great-great grandchildren should exclusively profit from somebody else's work is antisocial, we are all citizens of the world.
(Jefferson quotes pulled from this letter: https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_8s12.html )
@GeofCox @CStamp @duncanlock lots of people submit their works directly into public domain, or a similar sharing license. Thomas Jefferson setup the basis of the current copyright/patent regime - at first with 7 years to recoup the costs of creation, bumped up to 14 years, before a work enters the public domain - Jefferson also said “He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lites his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.” and that...