The problem with your definition is that the pre-copyright history is a good example of why we don't need copyright. The US applied copyright laws very late (similar to what China did recently), which led it to be the nation where the citizens read the most in the 19th century. This then led to the cultural explosion we know.

Free reproduction of "original creative works" fuels original creation, too, while creating tight monopolies over intellectual works and universes has led to a decreased creativity around them.

See the dire state of the US film making industry, as an example. Or the vast amount of bizarre lawsuits such as the one for the "Bittersweet Symphony".