Larry Lessig admits the obvious: if dead musicians can sign a petition, then they can be inspired to create new works. So it seems that retroactive copyright extension is OK after all. Or maybe the musicians just want more money for work they've already done? Nah...

Meanwhile, the Open Rights Group is running a Release The Music campaign, with a petition you can sign against term extension. There's also one asking for the right to privately copy CDs to iPods.

If the UK can auction off the airwaves for mobile phone operators and broadcasters, etc. then perhaps they should auction off the term extension for each work? After all, it is the public's art they'd be selling.

Naturally, only the most valuable works would be worth the copyright holders bidding for.

What's more there's nothing to stop philanthropists bidding for a work in order to re-release it copyleft.

For that matter, there's nothing to stop large numbers of fans bidding for a work in the same way.

In fact, who needs the government? One could simply set up some kind of www.digitalartauction.com web site to enable copyright holders to sell their works even before their copyright has expired - or perhaps even before they've been published!

What I find laughable is the idea that even if the UK did extend copyright for another half a century, copyright will be worth a fig in the next decade.

The UK will be brought into line with the US for political reasons. The term will be extended. That copyright is actually ineffective let alone irrational and unethical is immaterial in this case.