You mean, that thing I've been saying all along is true? That large corporations routinely commit copyfraud, that they act with impunity, and there there are no real remedies? And that once we create automated filters these corporations can use to claim our work, it'll be worse?
Or that you found a blog by someone whose understanding of my position on copyright is just as flawed and cartoonish as yours?
In small words, then: giving creators more "copyright" does no good if we're in concentrated markets where intermediaries (entertainment & tech companies, who have interlocking boards and overlapping major investors and are basically the same thing) rule all.
Because without competition, these companies merely demand that all the new rights given to creators be turned over as part of standard, nonnegotiable boilerplate. Then they use that to attack independents, making it harder to opt out of their system.
Creating regimes like notice-and-takedown or mandatory filtering just hands more advantage to the corporations that alienate creators from our labour, as you can see in this example. Firms excel at playing these automated systems, because they do so day in and day out.
The "anti-abuse" features in these systems make them even harder to use, requiring more expertise, putting them further from the reach of working creators -- and everyone else ensnared in the system, their work improperly censored.
Fixing this system requires more competition for our work. Sellers in a buyers market always lose. Always. Without exception. It is the iron law of economics, the single piece of orthodoxy every economist agrees on.
There are lots of ways to do this (breaking up the platforms, for example). Adding $100-$300mm to the cost of running a platform makes things worse. Only a tiny number of existing winners in the field can afford this.
What's more, it puts a floor on how small the pieces are that antitrust regulators can break them up into. Once they are the designated copyright cops, with $100-300mm duties, the platforms can't be made to small to perform those duties.
Mate, if you think FB and Google are high-handed and imperious in 2018, just give it a decade of NO competition, not even having to buy up or crush promising upstarts. You're going to HATE Facebook 2028.
Finally, the sexist jerk who wrote that 7-year-old piece you found has failed to note that my wife -- a brilliant, BAFTA-winning creator in her own right, then Education Commissioner for C4 -- is not called "Doctorow." FFS.
(She was just nominated for an Emmy)
