I wasn't particularly advocating a position one way or another, just providing some historical perspective on the origin of intellectual property protections and a link to reasoned, thoughtful analysis on the issue. Take it our reject it as you wish.
An historical perspective is useful as a contrast to a contemporary debate where the course of business and conduct seems to define a baseline of rights for many. The question, to me, isn't particularly whether Disney can or even should have extended IP protection for its movies and characters. Far more interesting is the question what should be the correct duration and breadth of these IP protections. Or whether certain or any IP rights should be extended given the competing interests of stimulating the creation and disclosure of ideas for the public benefit, how to best incent this creativity, and the public benefit to use, expand on and improve ideas or limited expression, that are, after all, extremely ephemeral.
Also interesting is the dynamic where large influential entities acting solely in self-interest and to the detriment of the general public can get Congress to hop around on command like 525 dancing bears. But that's a whole different issue.