I don't see the point in this. The constitution doesn't require the government to enforce copyrights and patents, it only allows it to do that. You don't need an amendment to stop doing that. And if you can't stop doing that using the normal process, you won't be able to pass an amendment either.

An interesting point of view, thanks for sharing.

> You don't need an amendment to stop doing that.

An amendment is the simplest and clearest way to do it. There are infinite ways to do it but most are more complex.

> And if you can't stop doing that using the normal process, you won't be able to pass an amendment either.

The normal process is opaque. Lobbyists will skillfully bend and twist some bill in a million ways so it would not really do what it is marketed to do.

A simple amendment, on the order of ~50 words, would be a much better and clear solution.