Copyright, like so much else in our lives, is a human construct. There's no law of nature saying it must exist, or that if it exists, it must exist as it does.

There are numerous options:

- De minimis use under fair use.

- Mechanical copyright clearances and royalties.

- Standing arrangements between news organisations and major social media outlets.

- Creative Commons or other licensing for reuse / redistribution. In this case, works which are CC / liberally licenced would see use over those which are not.

- Those not wishing their works to be reused could explicitly note this, though of course under current copyright doctrine, that is the default.

- Licensing agencies similar to ASCAP or Harry Fox for clearing online media requests. (There are several of these now.)

Overall, though, copyright as it stands gets in the way of making information available. The Constitutional intent in the US is concerened with the lack of motive to create content. That manifestly seems not to be the problem at present. Constructing an arbitrary lottery system for lucky shutterbugs / videographers seems to have its own share of issues.

There's also the elephant in the room that embedded contact creates tracking opportunities for the originating sites and their advertising/surveillance partners. Killing that niche would be a net social good.