Further to my post on internet-access as a right, Denis Pelli and Charles Bigelow have plotted the growth in rates of authorship since 1400:
This is the first published graph of the history of authorship. We found that the number of published authors per year increased nearly tenfold every century for six centuries. By 2000, there were 1 million book authors per year. One million authors is a lot, but they are only a tiny fraction, 0.01 percent, of the nearly 7 billion people on Earth. Since 1400, book authorship has grown nearly tenfold in each century. Currently, authorship, including books and new media, is growing nearly tenfold each year. That's 100 times faster. Authors, once a select minority, will soon be a majority.
Their criterion for what counts as published authorship is being read by 100 or more people. They anticipate uinversal authorship sooner rather than later and that 'International concern for the minority who can't read may soon extend to those who can't publish'. The analogy works only half way. Having access to the technical means of authorship may well come to be regarded as an important right; but no one can have a right to some given number of readers (100-plus or whatever) without there being a corresponding requirement for others to read them (when this doesn't happen of its own accord, so to say); and it's hard to see there being widespread agreement to such a moral or legal requirement.