Comment by CaptArmchair

Interoperability isn't the problem. Leverage to enforce your own IP, or lack thereof as an individual, is.

Just because you publish content on the Web doesn't mean you give license to anyone to use it however they want. IP is rooted on a foundational principle of giving explicit consent. Copyleft is using that principle to explicitly state "anyone is free to use this however they want". Without that consent, it's assumed that the author can ask you to cease and desist. (Hence why e.g. wikipedia is plastered with creative Commons license mentions)

Sure, there are fair use exceptions. But if you take a close look at the conditions that need to be met before a published copy can be considered fair use, it's not as clear cut as it seems.

Thing is, only big media outlets with capital, like the NYTimes, are able to litigate against big actors who wholesale misuse interoperability after a tragedy of the commons kind of fashion.

This imbalance in resources and capital to enforce rights between a handful of big actors and everyone else is exactly what Doctorow draws attention to in the interview.