Regardless, I think it seems important to create a system for tracking attestation of AI produced materials, especially with regard to disinformation campaigns. This may not be the sole/express purpose of the legislation, but we will need systems of attribution in the future to determine what's human made and what's not.
No one can opt-out of copyrighted content, and if they could, copyrighted works would become the slim minority of all content, or cease to exist entirely.
Even aside from any technology angle, the human mind is fundamentally very good at copying and modifying information-- it's why we can have a coherent cultural zeitgeist rather than individual siloed units of Capital-A Art. You can aspire to be part of that, and be respected for your contribution to it, but expecting everyone else to hobble their potential in service of your fetish for purity is self-indulgent if not downright sociopathic.
TBH, I feel like AI is eventually going to be slotted in as a tool rather than something magical. I can't draw a straight line or a circle, but we don't feel the need to permanently stamp pictures as "he used a straightedge and compasses!" (or "He used Krita!" these days) The ability to make lots of fairly realistic stuff cheap may change some value propositions (see: portrait painters when photography took off) but eventually we'll get past the initial panic phase.