This is what the xxAA is attempting to prevent. It is impossible to do what this bill would mandate except by building hardware that would play only those files that bear a special "seal of approval" that could only be added to a file by a small circle of publishers. If standard-format files can be played, or if just anybody could add copy-protection codes to files, then the system simply won't work. Bootlegged files with the protection stripped off are indistinguishable from files recorded on Joe Sixpack's pre-ban camcorder. Bootlegged files with the old protection stripped off and new (looser) protection codes added by Joe Sixpack are indistinguishable from files recorded on Joe Sixpack's new Leghorn-compliant camcorder. Ergo, the only solution is to compel Joe Sixpack to go, hat in hand, to a Hollyweird-licensed place to have his files recoded (for a modest fee... or a not-so-modest fee if the files are to be coded for publication rather than only for one person's use).
I'm paranoid, but not that paranoid. You are suggesting that home recording would be impossible.
What's more likely is that some security firm like Verisign would issue certificates, the way they do for secure web sites. This costs money, but it is not out of reach for small companies.
The only reason an artist would do this is to enjoy the same copy protection available to the big guys. Folks willing to release unprotected works would not be blocked.