The fundamental problem of intellectual property is that it protects the interests of large corporations far more than those of small creators. IP only matters if you have the resources to defend it in court or if your content isn't worth the effort to steal.
US IP law was written far before the scale of indie digital content or the mere concept of sampling was a blip in lawmakers' eyes.
It was made for broadcasters and publishers to go after industrial scale bootlegging of books and movies.
That sounds more like an implementation/enforcement problem than of the concept of IP.
If [
1) disputes were decided on the merits and
2) costs of dispute resolution were
2.a) deferred until decision-time,
2.b) born by the decided-against party, and
2.c) made the decided-for party whole and then some
], I bet either
A) an industry would spring up to identify wronged creators and fund defenses of their IP, or
B) industry would just pay to license the copyrighted work.
