Copyright is more than an outdated law failing to evolve as fast as the industries it protects and its distribution channels.

• The fair use/fair dealing provision that lobbyists are trying to abolish as they feel it gives the public too much access to other people’s original works to build upon (Dyson, P. 2016); and

• Copyright extensions: it is not exactly a new issue, but the length of the term the copyright law covers is, for many people, too long. Between 1710 and 1998 it changed from 14 years from creation to 70 years after the death of the author. Some claim it is too long a term and this “hinders creative repurposing of older works” (Patry, W., 2012)

• Power play: “Law’s role is less and less to support creativity and more and more to protect certain industries against competition” (Lessig, L. 2005). As it was noticeable in the Jon Else v. Fox case mentioned above. Whereas in theory the Copyright Law does offer provisions that technically would allow people to, within reason, use someone else’s work, in reality, it is about whoever has the most money and power. 

However, abolishing copyright is not the answer. At least not yet. Whereas the Creative Commons license, the Open Source Movement and Copyleft offer somewhat positive alternatives, the Copyright Law needs simply reviewing and updating according to technological advances and aim at the real protection of authors rather than corporations. While industries like the music one needs to adapt and develop new business models in order to continue to profit from their products without jeopardising the public’s access to it.