Copyright Law is the existing and established answer to that question that society has agreed upon. The article already explained how it benefits society: by protecting the people who create things of value for long enough that they can profit, in order to incentivize the creators to create. I don’t see how asking this sheds any light on the discussion, am I missing something or can you elaborate more?
We are discussing whether changing it makes sense. Society can agree to change the rules. Creators are not creating because copyright exists they are creating to make something. Copyright allows them to be the only person making money from their work. Why grant them that right when it doesn't exist in other industries. Come up with an amazing idea like selling bagged milk and everyone can copy you. Should we give them 95 years to be the only person who can sell a bag milk?
I’m not sure I understand what you mean; that right does exist in other industries in the form of patents and trademarks. You can register BaggedMilk(tm) and get protection. You can patent your bagged milk process or invention and get protection, if it’s a new idea. The terms aren’t the same as copyrights, but the protections and the reasons behind it are similar.
If you share with society should you be able to control other people's use of it?
How does that benefit society? Remember the rules are enforced by society and need to serve society.