[nradov]

This is just straight up false. Apparently you don't understand bankruptcy law. Courts will prioritize the interests of creditors first.

And the notion of a law requiring source code to be released in the public domain is so stupid. The source code is an asset which can potentially be sold to benefit creditors. And often the source code contains IP owned by third parties who wouldn't allow a release anyway.

[ndriscoll]

The law is what the people say it is. As the previous generation that created this system dies their successors can repeal eternal copyright laws and institute consumer protections again. e.g. we can demand source escrow to receive copyright (with a short grace period for current copyright holders to register/set up escrow), drastically shorten the period, demand copyrighted material continue to be made available or you lose your monopoly, etc. Or just abolish the whole system, which might completely lose its purpose if AI continues to improve. Actually companies might be doing this themselves on accident by using AI to generate assets, making them ineligible for copyright.

All it takes is for young people to decide that they actually don't think they should have to pay a subscription to e.g. listen to music that came out when their dead great grandparents were kids or that they should have no rights to own anything ever.

The same people whose student loans couldn't be discharged in bankruptcy could I'm sure consider the idea that companies' obligations to them can't be either.

[brewdad]

I wish them luck. I won’t hold my breath.