a great many works of art were created by artists who were commissioned to make them for money. Isn't that exactly what people are suggesting as an alternative

a great many works of art were created by artists who were commissioned to make them for money. Isn't that exactly what people are suggesting as an alternative to copyright? This isn't an argument against receiving money for your craft (I would argue that "profit motive" is inaccurate), but an argument against a legal construct which allows you to continually benefit in perpetuity via artificial constraints. Would someone like Mark Twain still have written books if he could not have made a penny out of it? Didn't Mark Twain marry into wealth specifically so he could write without any monetary worries?