While an interesting analysis, I think it should be pointed out this is a nonstandard opinion. I don't have a problem with nonstandard opinions, I have a fine collection of them myself, I only object when people try to claim them as the mainstream interpretation. You ought to know when you've left the mainstream.
The mainstream interpretation most certain is that copyright is to protect creators, not distributors.
> The mainstream interpretation most certain is that copyright is to protect creators, not distributors.
That is certainly the idealized, simplified narrative that most everyone will have been taught these days, but in terms of how copyright actually came about, way back when, it is largely a case of post-hoc rationalization. Hence the link: majority opinion doesn't change reality, only its perception.
The mainstream interpretation most certain is that copyright is to protect creators, not distributors.