> And this point isn't even up for debate. Present value calculations essentially prove that a copyright long-tail provides minimal benefit to a corporation. Especially since long-tail sales are incredibly rare.

Actually, the long tail does benefit corporations.

90% of all money goes to circa 10% of PRS for Music members. Those 10% members being the big labels.

The companies themselves have a long tail, but the losses in the 90% of their long tail are paid for many times over by the successes of the 10%.

The long tails is literally he business model of the music industry. Saying it provides minimal benefit is kind of moot. It’s how showbiz works.

> So it a 1/200,000 shot at making a classic that will actually sell 100 years from now.

Any stats or references to back that up, or have you pulled that number out of a hat?

> And even for that one shot, the discount rate says a million dollars of sales 100 years from now is worth a couple thousand dollars now. There is no way 100-year copyright incentives art now

I have no idea what this discount rate you’re talking about is (I don’t think we don’t have anything like that in the UK), but the long duration of copyright totally incentivises creation of art if you think about it.