to me, this is tough issue even in it's basic, most honest and pure form, apart form the greedy lawyers and executives, etc.
like rjent, i am continually designing new product, and don't get any more pay on past work, despite it's prolific, worlwide distribution and use. if you have a PC, or use the internet, there is a high probability that you are using one of my designs. if i WERE to get paid like that, i'd be retired a while ago living very well. i'd like that very much, honestly, and sometimes wonder if that wouldn't be a more fair model seeing how much profit the corporation actually makes off this product. but they make profit by NOT paying me royalties, whereas the copyright industry MUST have royalties to make profit. kinda seems like the actual producers of the product are not the real base for model consideration, but maximizing profit for the industry.
the pervasive and overwhelmingly dominant income method for my line of work is the corporate or business salary model. that means i get paid a steady income to do what they expect me to do, and that's it. nothing more. i'm evaluated annually against an aggressively compettitve and high performance oriented standard. if a get "laid off", my paycheck ends.
my designs are copied and leveraged into new designs all the time, by our corporation and rivals. i am not compensated, even if there is a lawsuit. no, i don't like that.
like pete, i think that musicians should be paid for their effort. making music, in many cases, takes a lot of hard work, study and time. it is a valid profession (it's even mentioned as an original skill in the bible). i think royalties are a fair way of compensation, given that the originator is the chief recipient. i think the ratio of profit distribution is the real problem?
copyright, to me, seems like a fair and just idea that gets exploited by greedy on one side, and ignored on the other. given electronic medium and the lack of copy control, copyright enforcement seems like fishing with a pole in a harbor-sized school of fish. the poor fish that get's 'caught' may, in fact, be doing 'wrong', but he's just doing what everyone else is and would be at a disadvantage if the didn't.
then there's that argument of copyright lifetime.
then there's the argument of it being subjective in court.
then there's the argument of being able to afford to be a musician BECAUSE of it (nowadays).
then there's ...(these my be the results of the lawyers, executives, and beuarocrats distorting and perverting the works).