The Cato Institute's perspective, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/strong-fair-use-...

"... critics rightly point out that U.S. trade agreements fail to capture the balance of creator and user interests imbedded in U.S. IP law. Trade agreements have been a one-way street that set a minimum level of protection. Limitations on creators’ rights—like fair use—are an important part of U.S. law but don’t get included in the agreements alongside things like longer monopoly terms and stricter enforcement.

... For example, the U.S. Copyright Office has proposed reforms to deal with the growing problem of “orphan works”—works that are protected by copyright but can’t be published because no one knows who owns the copyright. The proposed reforms would limit the damages these phantom copyright owners can claim from infringement after such works are published. That proposal is potentially barred by draft language in the TPP requiring the availability of full damages in every case."

EFF and others addressed the USTR on Orphan Works, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/08/users-ustr-dont-sign-a...

"EFF has joined as signatory to a letter that calls on the U.S. Trade Representative not to agree to any provisions in the TPP that could prevent Congress from enacting fixes to address the orphan works problem. Other signatories to the letter are Authors Alliance, Creative Commons, Knowledge Ecology International, and New Media Rights."

The final TPP text? Orphan Works ignored, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/final-leaked-tpp-text-...

"On damages, the text (QQ.H.4) remains as bad as ever: rightsholders can submit “any legitimate measure of value” to a judicial authority for determination of damages, including the suggested retail price of infringing goods. Additionally, judges must have the power to order pre-established damages (at the rightsholder's election), or additional damages, each of which may go beyond compensating the rightsholder for its actual loss, and thereby create a disproportionate chilling effect for users and innovators.

No exception to these damages provisions is made in cases where the rightsholder cannot be found after a diligent search, which puts the kibosh on ideas for the introduction of an orphan works regime that would cap remedies available against those who reproduce these otherwise-unavailable works."

Moreover, the part of your comment concerning orphan works was added to your comment, without remarking about the update, after I wrote the comment you just replied to.

Please stop doing this.

(I fleshed this comment out after writing it and then noticing that you'd asked me to respond to an edit you wrote after I wrote my comment.)