RE: Do Copyrights have a future?

The potential of this new technology is not realised just to protect the earnings of few people.

This is where your logic breaks down.

It is about control, not about money.
Yes, the masses are told that copyright is to protect the author, and so that they get the money.

But, if you do an actual evaluation of funds going to authors, it is pitiful.
Like 10¢ out of a $10 book.

If copyright was to protect the author, than it has completely failed.
And should be revised so that it does so.

Copyright is to protect corporations, such as Dizney.
Every time Micky Mouth was supposed to fall into public domain, the length of time for copyright has been extended.

And, the movie The Lion Thing was a blatant rip off from another cartoon. I mean, almost exact, except one was white, and the other was yellow. Well, copyright didn't protect the original creator. It was deemed that Dizney changed the story "just enough".

Today, many authors are finding it better, cheaper, AND MORE PROFITABLE to just put their books on line for free. (with a patreon or donate button)

So, copyright is a farce, that corporations will maintain as long as they have any power left. It does not serve the public, and it does not serve the author, and perhaps, never did.