If businesses are unable to regulate themselves, it must be done by law.
If copyright is the root of the problem, it may be time to remove that protection; or at least revert it so it is more in-line with patent law expiration.
No more author's life + 75. Lets try 15-20 once again, and no derivative protection, unless significantly different, receive protection.
Also, different terms for different works. Having the same rules for software, drugs, books, paintings etc. is ridiculous.
Software should require disclosure of details of what is protected (e.g. the source) so it can be public used post expiry - just as patents give you a monopoly only what is disclosed in the patent.
I'd add that functionally dependent software that is used for the items primary purpose, or its features, should also receive little to no protection, and be disclosed up-front.
If copyright is the root of the problem, it may be time to remove that protection; or at least revert it so it is more in-line with patent law expiration.
No more author's life + 75. Lets try 15-20 once again, and no derivative protection, unless significantly different, receive protection.