The UK has a system for licensing orphaned works -
explained here.
It sounds like a good system. I don't know how well it works in practice, but I appreciate the fact that orphaned works don't just become unusable.
In terms of reform I'd like to see us get more creative. Not just whether terms should be lengthened or shortened. I like the idea of having to renew with a fee that increases over time. That would keep Disney happy because they'll always be able to afford to renew Steamboat Willy but it'll incentivise people to get go of rights that aren't really being used.
And/or maybe we could have an initial term that works as now - a complete monopoly to the rights-holder - with a gradual reduction of rights after that. e.g. after X years you still hold the rights but you can't arbitrarily refuse license requests, maybe at some point after that maximum license fees kick in which then reduce over time, eventually there's a period where you retain moral rights only, then it falls out of copyright as now.
I don't know - I'm just thinking out loud but I do think we need to redress the balance somehow and just playing with the term length is only one thing we could do.
Although, of course, changing this wouldn't be easy. I can see why Ms Paley decided just to treat copyright as if it doesn't exist. Whilst I agree with her diagnosis of the situation, I don't agree that simply ignoring a bad law is the way forward.