a strange interpretation of the US constitution about copyright

In a blog on infoworld the following strange statement appeared:

The US Constitution is clear that the reason for copyright/patent/etc. is to benefit creators of property, not users of property. I appreciate the reason: give creators a reasonable return on their investment.

Actually the US constitution seems to clearly say the opposite. Here is a link to section 8 of the US constitution. The important phrase is "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries".

There is no mention of providing benefits to creators of written works and inventions. The aim is clearly stated to promote the progress of science and useful arts and the exclusive right which operates for limited times is merely a method of achieving that aim.