And wages give wage earners a reason to work, yet you aren't paid for a second more than you worked. If a wage earner wants to have money when they retire or to leave a legacy for their children, they have to actively set money aside while they are working. Quite frankly, I don't see why authors should be any different in this respect.

That being said, I acknowledge that there is a purpose for copyrights. Copyrights are necessary because you have to do the work before you can sell it, and because it is too easy for someone else to start reproducing your work once you have made it public. Patents are based upon the same principle: you have to do the work (research and development) before you introduce a product, and it is far too easy for someone else to start reproducing that product once you have made it public. Yet patents only receive 20 years of protection. That is true even though a great patent requires many more man hours to develop, much more talented people to develop it, and resources that are much more sophisticated to undertake the development. All of that means a single great patent will cost much more to develop than hundreds of great books. But, in many respects, authors receive much more protection. Why?