As previously discussed, property rights for non-rivalrous goods are not the same as for tangible property, because they're not needed as a rationing mechanism to allocate finite resources.
However, we want new works to be created, and a good way to encourage people to do things is to pay them for it. So we should keep copyright in some form. But whereas copyright can enrich us by encouraging the creation of new works, it impoverishes us by restricting access to existing works. We need to strike a balance. The current Berne Convention stipulation of 50 years after the author's death is far too long - according to the EU it was intended to benefit two generations of the author's descendants. The extension to 70 years after the author's death in the EU and the USA is supposed to allow for longer lifespans. But it's fantastically implausible that a prospective author would be deterred from producing creative work by the consideration that her grandchildren might not receive royalties from it.
I suggest that we retain copyright in its current form, with the exception that we restrict it to five years from first publication. That should be sufficient in most cases for the author to receive a fair return, but we should allow extensions year by year if the last year's sales of a work are the highest yet, so as to accommodate works that take some time to become popular.
This paper attempts a theoretical analysis of the optimum (welfare maximizing) copyright term, and comes up with fifteen years. Whereas this one, which I find more convincing, thinks two years is about right (reportedly the authors think their model unrealistic, and actually believe that copyright should not exist at all). Before we adopt my proposal worldwide we should probably explore the optimum term more thoroughly: we might decide to adopt different terms for different classes of work.
I suggest that we add an additional right to protect one's reputation as the author of a copyrightable work, to apply during one's lifetime after the copyright period has expired. This would mean that anyone using the work in public would be required to state whether it was used with the author's permission. The author would have the right to waive this requirement for some or all users.