This is a short rant about IP rights
IP rights are strange. They are not intuitive. For example, one doesn’t really “own” a copyright. One has the benefit of it for limited period of time. Why?
Because granting copyright protection is controversial. The law grants it for the “public good” - not for the good of the author. And what is the public good? To give just enough incentive for authors to produce more content. That is it. Grant too much and assertions of copyright license fees stifle creation and distribution of new content. See the conflict?
With this in mind, consider the current legal flap over the copyright to Sherlock Holmes stories. Cone on! Sadly for us all, the author, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died in 1931. That was more than 80 years ago. Neither he nor his estate have nor are likely to produce any more Holmes stories. So, what good does it do the public that any of Doyle’s works are still subject to copyright? And yet, Doyle’s estate still wants fees for use of the character.
Outrageous? You make the call.