84 years old and she extends the copyright for 50 years.
Causing headaches for anybody that wants to perform this sentimental relic of the anti war movement.
I think that’s why she got songwriting credit. Its yet another copyright strategy.
Except it won’t extend the copyright at all
Ok, ignorance fought. 
Geez that’s a long time. Imho 50 years is long enough to collect from old work.
Any heirs can earn their own $$$$.
The OP sounds like a Huffington Post article. While not technically incorrect, it completely misrepresents the original article in a fashion that is designed to push a point.
Besides, it’s a bit hard to imagine that a lot of people were really longing for the song to enter public domain in 2051.
Well, perhaps I’ll have to start reading Huffington Post then. Do they carry a lot of entertainment news?
Please explain how extracting rent is creative.
(And, no, I’m not talking about landlords.)
We have limited-term copyrights for a reason: Eventually, the free-loading ends. The free ride is over, and the corporation has to become productive, not just extractive. A single person being able to live for a lifetime off of one or two successful works is acceptable, given that having works that successful is akin to winning the lottery. Their heirs living off of, not just investments, but continued royalties is pointless. We’re no longer rewarding creativity with a large admixture of luck, we’re rewarding pure luck, completely untainted by any productive impulse.
We’re back to just haggling about length. Almost nobody worth listening to claims that no copyrights should exist. (And I have my doubts about the “almost” but perhaps someone could provide the exception I’ve never found.) Copyright has already been longer than patents because the useful life of a creative work is on average longer than the useful life of a technological innovation and over time the life of the former keeps getting longer while the life of the latter keeps growing shorter. Creators certainly should be able to provide for their children and heirs just as the owner of any other business should.
The people who squawk about copyrights would do so if copyright were back at the 28+28 length it used to be. I’ve stated on this Board I thought that was a good length. The world has changed, though. The ability to upload every piece of creative work to the Internet makes copyright enforcement nearly meaningless at the same time it has made every piece of creative work forever valuable. Copyright needs to be completely rethought from scratch.
Cutting it’s length isn’t the answer. It’s not in the top 100 of concerns.