How about instead of spending billions of man hours and dollars on an antiquated conception like intellectual property when the fundamental assumptions of its premise have changed (primarily, that information was not functionally free to store and transmit instantly to anyone, anywhere) you say "hey, maybe it doesn't make sense to create artificial state run monopolies for an imaginary incentives structure we have no evidence actually works and could try something else, including nothing, and see how that goes".
Good luck with that debate. In the real world copyright, trademarks, patents, international treaties, etc. and the national laws of hundreds of countries governing those are a reality. This stuff is super complicated. Within the context of all of that, coming up with a pragmatic way forward is the only debate worth having.
A pragmatic way forward is absolutely to ramp down the institution over time as obsolete. When the car came out farriers did not lobby the government that they needed their institution protected because that is just the way things are.
Its the same argument that was constantly used in defense of segregation, slavery, imperialism, colonialism, feudalism, the belief in the humors, the prohibition of drugs, why housing prices are out of control, etc - its always "thats the way things are and they cannot change". Which is total bollocks.
