Depends on what the copyright is on and how old the claim is. Why? Because artists always get the shit end of the stick. You know all those beautiful, iconic statues and paintings? There is no reason those artists should receive so little for literally creating marvels that withstood hundreds and thousands of years that define our spirit. But at the same time, the creator should not hold exclusivity for all time, as eventually that work of art might come to define a group if not an entire civilization. For art, I'll always hear the case, and the appropriate right-holder time period is (life of the creator + 40 years) and the company who employed the artist has to share revenue with the surviving family much more equitably (family gets 50%, no fuck you Mickey).
Agreed.For actual artists, they get jewed so hard. Go read up about MJ's and virtually every musician of the past's contract 'deals'.
Never sign a contract written by a jew. Don't even give a jew an autograph, because they'll say that it was you signing an agreement to sign their contract.