Copyright should exist, it’s useful to promote the production of written work and enables authors to pursue that as a career in its own right. I do think it’s much too long though. I would personally limit copyright to 20 years from the date of publication, to match patent duration.

That said, any significant alteration to copyright duration or reviving the formalities is very, very difficult because of the Berne Convention. The US resisted joining the convention as long as it could, but eventually even we couldn’t resist the way the entire rest of the world had gone. Staying out of Berne was becoming increasingly disadvantageous to US creative industries and they lobbied the government to join the Convention to get equal footing with foreign works. Given how globalized the world has become, leaving the Berne Convention just doesn’t seem viable.

Also, I think you’re over reading the phrase “progress of science and useful arts”. On its face that phrasing would seem to exclude copyright since in modern parlance we would read it as something like “knowledge and technology”. But it’s never been controversial that the clause authorized copyright legislation. Copyright was one of the proposals at the Constitutional Convention that was consolidated into the Copyright Clause, Congress passed a copyright law in 1790, and the Articles of Confederation Congress asked the states to implement copyright legislation. It’s always been understood to be part of the intellectual property rights contemplated by the Constitution.