I know I'm opening up a can of worms here, but: Maybe, just maybe, a 200+ year old set of laws designed to give a short-term limited monopoly to book printers may not be suitable to apply to all forms of human expression? And maybe, just maybe, it's been extended and made all-encompassing and applied to other forms of expression not for the benefit of society, but for the benefit of large corporations that want to own everything, including artistic expression? It feels particularly problematic in music, where riffing on and extending/mutating what is popular is 100% normal and traditional. To the authors I follow: you're good. Your use fits the original intent! But - if your copyrights never expire, you won't be remembered like Shakespeare. Things need to pass to the public domain eventually if you want them to live forever.