> Copyright laws are designed to ensure that authors and performers receive compensation for their labors without fear of theft and to encourage them to continue their work. The laws are not intended to provide income for generations of an author’s heirs, particularly at the cost of keeping works of art out of the public’s reach.

How are they not, when they're set at decades past the author's death? The Berne Convention mandates that all works other than photography and cinematography are to be copyrighted until at least 50 years past the author's death.

And as usual countries are free to go even further: the European "Copyright Directive" (2001/29/EC) extends it to 70 years (as does the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 in the US).

How is this anything but providing income for generations of an author's heir exactly?