An Anonymous Coward writes:
The United Kingdom is holding a consultation as to when a provision of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 should take effect. Copyright in works of artistic craftsmanship—utilitarian objects (even if mass-produced) which are deemed artistic—shall be extended. Currently, the copyright lasts for 25 years after an item is first offered for sale; the new term will be for the life of the creator, then another 70 years. This means that some works which are now in the public domain will become copyrighted. Publishers of derivative works of such items, for example a book or film in which a work of artistic craftsmanship was photographed, will be obliged to obtain permissions, except for uses which fall under fair dealing.
The provisions may come into effect as soon as 2016, or as late as five years hence, depending on the outcome of the consultation.
I submitted the story. I see no inconsistency between the text you've quoted and the Ars Technica and Dezeen articles. One article quotes a publisher, and the other quotes a different publisher, as well as a letter signed by various "design historians, design writers and design educators." They might be wrong, but they do work in the field. The possibility you raise, that existing books may have to be pulped, is a possible consequence they decry. In contrast to your suggestion, I would expect that task to fall on publishers and booksellers.
The taking of a photograph, or the creation of a useful object, could be deemed non-creative. This story is about objects which meet a threshold of originality, which in the UK is lower than in some other parts of the world.
Here's a link to someone's blog post, where the notion of derivative works is explained succinctly:
Note the mention of "a painting or photograph of a sculpture". The situation is similar to a photograph with a work of artistic craftsmanship as its subject.