I think one the huge problems with the system is that even with the best intentions and honesty you might not get it right. You certainly might be discouraged from creating something potentially useful.
Conversely, as has been seen, if you game the system you can hope for abusive damages and disproportionate power. By no means am I saying that authors shouldn't be recognized but lying in the weeds hoping to sue someone for more than you would properly have received for a license is abusive.
I'm saddened by the chilling affect it has on good projects. I really like things like the Creative Commons and the GPL. At least they announce themselves and their expectations.
Hypothetically, what happens if one contributes work to a CC project that is subsequently turned into a commercial venture. If your contribution helps make it commercial but you did not gain from or know of the commercial abuse can you be blamed?
ie A brilliant compilatoin of all things Cartographer's Guild is made by Smeagol. It's so slick Sauroman comes along and repackages is (slightly) and sells it without consent or sharing any profits. Does Smeagol have anything to worry about from authors earlier in the chain of authorship?