There is nothing bad with them having to work hard to make money. The offer for music is incredibly high and most people would prefer playing music over doing t

There is nothing bad with them having to work hard to make money. The offer for music is incredibly high and most people would prefer playing music over doing their job. The market is oversaturated and it gets worse and worse the more time passes (assuming a portion of people will be content with music from the past). It's normal that making music pays penny. Redistributing money would be terrible: the government would have another token to use to raise taxes (on which they can surely pocket a % for managing the work - free of market interference, so with zero competition or attention to waste) and the artist would have less of an incentive to make truly great pieces. That said, we don't need copyright laws or any other law which facilitate rich producers to get money or censor people. If we didn't have an expensive government upholding copyright laws, producers could just sell music with a non-redistribute contract. If someone breaks that contract they can go to a court and get a monetary compensation. If they're selling so many copies that they can't keep track of all the people sharing their music, consider it a market fee on excessive profits. The problem in our society is that rich producers can corrupt the government (and media / education: how many people consider copyright to be fair?) and get them to pass laws which give them extra power.