And what of music? Are the pieces that you have composed still yours, or do they now belong to mankind (careful how you answer this one
)
You do not make it sufficiently clear if it is me that you're asking, but I'll assume that it is, since no other composer seems to be contributing in this thread. The answer is one that needs not only care but due consideration, for it is not necessarily as simple as you may assume.
One has first to define what is meant by "the pieces I have composed". Now, before you think of complaining that I appear to be trying to dodge the answer by hiding behind semantics, I'll explain myself. Some years ago, the composer Anthony Payne made a brilliant realisation from the sketches that Elgar left for his Third Symphony. At the time Elgar died, there was some confusion as to how much of the work had been "composed" and the written sketches alone might appear to suggest that not much had been done; it is very probable, however, that Elgar had actually "composed" most if not all of the work, or at least gotten it to a certain level of completeness, in his mind. This, however, could not "belong" to mankind or anyone else except him, as there was no written evidence to support his thoughts so far and therefore, as "mankind" could not listen, respond to or evaluate the work that Elgar had "composed", it could not "belong" anywhere other than in the composer's head.
Having said that, we now turn to what happens when a piece has been not only composed but also written down in final draft by the composer yet which still awaits public performance; this, likewise, cannot realistically be deemed to "belong" to anyone other than its composer either, since no one else can get anything from it until they can hear it.
In the case of pieces that are available for general public consumption in the sense that they appear on currently available recordings and are performed at public concerts, broadcast and so on (and these, I think, are the ones to which your question is principally directed), the benefit of the music belongs to whoever wants to get whatever they can from it, whereas the music itself belongs to the composer. Now I suspect that your reason for warning me to be careful how I answer your question is because you either don't - or do(!) - want to witness me tripping myself over in matters relating to copyright. We are, however, dealing with two entirely different types of concurrent value here - the value of the music in terms of what the listener gets out of it and the value of the music to the composer in terms of the royalties he/she may derive from public airings and/or publication of it; accordingly, I see no problem in distinguishing between them and, after all, the value to the listener will always vary from one listener to another, whereas that to the composer will be quantifiable and definable in currency from time to time (for all its unpredictability).
Sorry for the length of this answer, but I hope at least that you can see that I have endeavoured to take it seriously and deal with it as comprehensively as I am able.
Best,
Alistair