That particular article has some interesting comments attached to it.
The hyperbole you mention is more along the lines of the potential future consequences of the path the Copyright Office's suggestions could lead to. There is no law before Congress, but there are discussions going on about what a new copyright law will look like, by people than do not have artist's interests at heart. This Copyright Office report is part of that conversation. By the time there is a proposed law before Congress, a lot of the decisions are baked into the cake and hard to change. So now is the time to influence the future law, if one emerges.
This article is a good reply to the article above:
Brad Holland has been focused on this issue for about 10 years. I listen closely to his take on the situation. So far I have not seen him proved wrong on the consequences of what is begin proposed. In fact Brad and company have proposed solutions to the problems that are tailored to the need, but they are consistently being ignored in the legislative process.
Claims tha your copyright will be protected under these proposals may be technically true, as long as you are not interested in having copyright act as a real protection tool in your effort to make money from your art.
Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at