Ya gotta remember that at its inception, at least in the US, copyright had 2 things going for it:

The duration was limited to 14 years, not the death of the author +95 or fucking whatever it is currently, and that much of that duration would need to get burnt up in duplication and distribution of the work, all of which had significant costs associated with it. Hundred year long guarantees with unlimited instant reproduction of a work and instant mass distribution functionally for free would have been anathema at the time, and this kind of abuse of the system goes directly counter to the original as-written intent.

Too bad those 'originalists' in the courts only use that concept to suppress women and minorities instead of maybe picking up a small W with it here.