But what were talking about isn’t implemented a flawed system, it’s improving one that’s already flawed, and the result still wouldn’t be perfect but it’s better than what currently exists

Except this is something we disagree on. I do not agree that the massive extensions to copyright are anything other than deeply flawed.

And it doesn’t prevent passing even better laws further down the line, but I think you know that creating new more comprehensive survivor benefits that would cover everyone is a much harder sell than a comparatively small tweak to copyright laws.

“But it’d be hard to do it right, let’s just bandaid it with more flaws.”

And if we remove those copyright benefits before those new systems are ready, you’re leaving people in the lurch without any safety net until those new systems can be created (if in fact they ever are)

I could maybe, maaaaybe, agree to a big shift with a grandfather clause. Anything already published would then get the old rules, and anything new would get the new, much less restrictive rules. I’d still rather just fix it properly, though.