The part of copyright that trends the other way as copying gets cheaper and more trivial for anyone to do is the statutory damages component. A fallback of $150

The part of copyright that trends the other way as copying gets cheaper and more trivial for anyone to do is the statutory damages component. A fallback of $150,000 per work as an alternative to expensive and lengthy discovery of actual damages makes sense in a world where your "threat model" is basically a large-scale commercial copying operation, but less so in a world of millions of users glibly making one-off infringements at the click of a mouse. The $150,000 figure is a maximum, and requires a finding of "willful" infringement, but even the lower boundary of $750 per work maps poorly to the current landscape. (You may recall waves of outrage over high demand letters, lawsuits and settlements against individual internet users in the days when the record labels were aggressively suing over "file-sharing," and those figures pretty much all arose from the statutory damages provisions of the copyright law.) The concept of statutory damages still makes sense, perhaps even moreso now given the difficulties in calculating damages, but the range of amounts is all out of whack, as is the hinging of enhanced on "willfullness" rather than some more relevant factor.