Digital BW, The Print

Lyons Cox writes:

> A recognized image in the public market has value.
> Physical prints from the estate have value.
> The -copyright- of that image has value to the estate.

The copyright belonged to the author; he's dead.  His descendants can go
out and earn a living for themselves.  I don't see why they should be
entitled to a free ride.  The kids of a coal miner get nothing after he
dies, even if he worked in a mine for forty years.

> To say copyright in not useful for the deceased and their heirs is
> tantamount to saying cash assets are not needed either.

Oh, it's useful for them.  I just don't see why they should be entitled
to profit from someone else's hard work.

> For example, the copyright of an artist can be passed on to non-profit
> public institutions providing another income stream to fund access.

Let the institution provide a useful service to society instead, in
exchange for money.

I'm just thankful that patents last for only 17 years (and cannot be
renewed).  If they were like copyrights, we'd still be living in caves.