Untitled
I have some issues with this:
1. All articles about this issue come from one source. And it isn’t in any way NYT, but “Journal of Biocommunication”. Whatever biology has to do with copyright for artists - I have no clue.
2. “The Next Great Copyright Act” is not a name of the bill, neither official or used by media. In fact, it’s a title of a lecture given by Register of Copyrights Maria A. Pallante. Not a bill, a lecture.
3. This text is full of emotionally charged vocabulary. Putting words like “privilege” or “pressure”, or making sweeping claims about a bill that doesn’t even exist doesn’t make it a viable source.
4. This works both ways. CGP Grey explained it well - remix is not an infringement. And change which would make any form of fair use banned will hurt people like you most. After all, if not laws we have we could be talking about Star Wars remakes made out of art that is in public domain, or: for all of us.
5. Unregistered work is orphaned anyway. Orphaned in this case means that one is unable to find copyright information regarding such piece.
6. This law can’t replace all copyright laws there are, because NO SUCH LAW EXISTS!
In fact, there is a site which has all the information about copyright law review: http://copyright.gov/laws/hearings/
All of that is at the moment a fear-mongering campaign to scare artists into a law which will hurt everyone: from old artists to new artists to public. Fair use, because that’s what apparently fuss is about, allows people to create stuff without worrying about being sued. And now apparently that is something bad.
And a tip: if you don’t want your art to be used in wrong ways, mark under which license the piece is.