"speecher" in the sense of "truther", right? Each time you argue for copyright monopoly, you are working to undermine free speech, plain and simple. you may not like it, but people like Ian Clarke, the founder of the freenet project, are right (and have much better understanding of the realities of digital information than you, apparently): copyright and free speech are incompatible.

http://freenetproject.org/philosophy.html
8. And what of copyright?
Of course much of Freenet's publicity has centered around the issue of copyright, and thus I will speak to it briefly. The core problem with copyright is that enforcement of it requires monitoring of communications, and you cannot be guaranteed free speech if someone is monitoring everything you say. This is important, most people fail to see or address this point when debating the issue of copyright, so let me make it clear:

You cannot guarantee freedom of speech and enforce copyright law

It is for this reason that Freenet, a system designed to protect Freedom of Speech, must prevent enforcement of copyright.

9. But how will artists be rewarded for their work without copyright?

Firstly, even if copyright were the only way that artists could be rewarded for their work, then I would contend that freedom is more important than having professional artists (those who claim that we would have no art do not understand creativity: people will always create, it is a compulsion, the only question is whether they can do it for a living).

Secondly, it could be questioned whether copyright is effective even now. The music industry is one of the most vocally opposed to enhancements in communication technology, yet according to many of the artists who should be rewarded by copyright, it is failing to do so. Rather it has allowed middle-men to gain control over the mechanisms of distribution, to the detriment of both artists and the public.

"A filtering method that looked for watermarks from a central database would be more effective. "

Except that it wouldn't. The set of technical requirements for an effective watermark--that it be undetectable to unauthorized parties, impossible to remove, and not affect sound/video quality--are virtually impossible to achieve simultaneously. Remember SDMI? An indelible watermarking technology is in the same category as an uncrackable DRM scheme. It would only be a matter of time before someone developed a watermark removal tool and released it to anyone who wanted it.