I feel like this is arguing word semantics without attempting to answer the question. I was talking about within a society that already has copyright. Let me ask it another way: assuming that we have a copyright system, why should my copyrights ever expire? Why should our system not protect my ability to make money on my work, and allow me to choose who inherits the income stream and becomes the future owner of the work? Money and property can be inherited and doesn’t revert to public ownership, why should IP? (Again, note I’m asking for discussion’s sake and for clarity, not suggesting my personal beliefs or advocating a specific policy.)
I feel like “default is that they belong to everyone” is a framing that doesn’t quite make sense, it’s mis-using the word “belong”. The less loaded way to phrase what you’re saying is that without copyright, there’s nothing preventing someone from copying my work, not that it’s somehow inherently everyone’s property (which is literally to say that it’s no-one’s property.)
I feel like “default is that they belong to everyone” is a framing that doesn’t quite make sense, it’s mis-using the word “belong”. The less loaded way to phrase what you’re saying is that without copyright, there’s nothing preventing someone from copying my work, not that it’s somehow inherently everyone’s property (which is literally to say that it’s no-one’s property.)