To Kill A Mockingbird is a fine example of how copyright is failing us all

"Because the purpose of copyright is not to reward authors (or, more often these days, copyright holders who are not authors but acquirers). It’s to benefit society."

1. Couldn't one say the same of property in general?

2. I don't think that the remarkable recent extensions of copyrights are good, but how is To Kill a Mockingbird an example of how copyright is failing us all? I can walk over to Barnes and Noble and pick up a copy for less than $10. I doubt there's a waiting list on it at the public library. And if I couldn't lay hands on it, I don't know that it would harm me, and perhaps not society.