You are not thinking of the harmful effects of copyright. The mechanism of copyright, by definition, is to restrict the flow of information. This is exactly what you do not want in an information economy.

First, because the cost of that restriction is effectively magnified. When information was in paper books, it was difficult to copy. Copyright restricted copies, but since people could not make copies it did not make much difference. But now information is digital the cost of copying is practically zero. That means the restrictions of copyright stops people realising a large benefit that would otherwise be available.

Second, the most vital ingredient in production of new information seems most likely not extra monetary incentive, but other information. And the fact that information is infinitely copyable amplifies its value. A single amount of money can pay for only one piece of information production. But a single amount of information can contribute, through copies, to an unlimited number of pieces of information production.

This is the funny thing. Copyright really only works with products that are substantially non-abstract, non-informational. When you have an economy that really is all informational, copyright does not actually make sense: its intrinsic contradiction just becomes too self-destructive.