In some ways it seems like the suggested legislation is a Trojan Horse. The outer covering of reasonableness in protecting the large image distributors and other mega corporations -like Getty.com- from a lawsuit if they inadvertently distribute content that is later contested masks the potential for abuse. The onus of tracking down, registering and protecting every bit of work through a likely onerous and draconian process is dumped on the creator. Large firms may have the resources to navigate the system but many artists can get screwed. Even if the artist somehow manages to get through it, the legislation would limit the amount they can claim (to $2000 per original item -not derived work- if I read that right).
Imagine for a second that an artist fails to protect a property correctly and they, or their heirs, lose it; the pirate who uses it to launch the next mega million Sponge Bob franchise can battle the artist on many fronts - and even if they somehow 'lose' and damages are awarded- the amount of damages may be so small as to provide no real restraint to a company worth many millions of dollars.
That's why previous efforts to pass similar legislation were shot down.
I actually think the potential for abuse can be greater in much the same way that the average citizens ability to run for public office is limited and controlled by the large sums of money required (and the need to sell part of your soul to party and lobbying groups) or in the way that electoral votes, the primary process and redistricting allows another level of control over voters. Think control and limiting access. Think of the potential use to squash creative works and people that criticize powerful companies, individuals or governments. Grabbing copyright of something that doesn't dot all the i's and cross all the t's Make the creator fight to prove ownership, meanwhile incurring debt while the offender fights a battle of attrition until you are worn out, broke or drop dead. If you think it can't happen, remember how SLAPP lawsuits were used to silence critics and force acceptance of terms by essentially beating people into submission?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLAPPSorry. Looks like I wrote a Theodore Kaczynski style manifesto but suffice it to say that the proposal is, at the very least flawed and potentially dangerous.
