That's how other industries are run nowadays. I'm not saying it's a good thing, but that rather this does not come from cluelesness about tech, but more about bringing tech into the legislatory mainstream.
Youtube's filter removed the audio track from a video of mine that was essentially silent to start with. There was certainly no music, TV, movie, etc... in the background.
Here's the video for the curious:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCEjJhm8qYM
There is someone with a financial interest in not having people watch it, but removing the audio won't help them.
That aside, the bill is designed to target "the big ones" because publishers want to gain access to profits from advertising. You just need to look at the people who initiated this tragedy.
I hate it that people don't talk about what problems the law intends to solve. You will be able to quickly reduce the answer to special interests. At that point, a legislative process should stop immediately. Will be interesting if the european institutions are able to do so.
What these rules do is destroy user generated content. Because your external HD can hold every Hollywood blockbuster in the last five years but it's nowhere near big enough for all the user generated content on YouTube.
A properly decentralized system can comply with the laws as well: you know what you put up, so there is a filter - it's just in meat space.
I think the bigger issue is that many YT creators rely on its ads for revenue.
YouTube's uploads filters don't work very well with Peppa Pig episodes that have been chopped up into 45 second pieces and reordered randomly.
In the end the big companies win and the individuals lose.