Ha-ha! Witty!
No, I read between the lines a little bit because this is Slashdot, and the only thing more safely assumed than the copyright = theft opinion of many of the hoi polloi would be their generally poor communication skills. And, actually, that's not what I assumed you were arguing, and said as much. I even thought I was pretty plain about this.
The reason I bring up the copyright limits of 200 years ago is that the 15-years with one extension arrangement popped up not all that long ago as being generally optimal for 'fostering creativity'. In addition to being far, far shorter than modern copyright laws, that limit is still sufficiently long that it would keep all four titles out of the public domain. If you're all about copyright as a long-term means of enriching the larger society, then that seems a relevant point, though I admit made it poorly.
Also, your grasp of hyperbole and irony are excellent. Do keep up the good work!
I suppose I am unnecessarily insulting, but this hardly the first of these copyright arguments I've seen around here, and they all seem to go in roughly the same direction. I'm pretty sure I understand you just fine. It's you who seems to be having difficulty understanding me, and I'll freely grant that may be my fault.