> The question here is really "Did the people who fronted the money for the content get paid?" For simplicity I'm ignoring royalties here. I admire your intel

> The question here is really "Did the people who fronted the money for the content get paid?" For simplicity I'm ignoring royalties here. I admire your intellectual honesty about admitting that royalties exist. Anyway, the question here is where did the money for up-front salaries come from and does does it keep coming when the if the publisher's profits are reduced? I have participated in a few crowdfunding campaigns and I agree that it could work for a specific niche: where the content creators are already well known enough that they can attract a sufficient audience that trusts them to do something sensible with their money. It's going to be hard for newcomers. Just look at failed kickstarters: there is a lot of trash there but there could be some unpolished gems there. > Rights management would have actually been counterproductive because the point of the art was the aggrandizement of the patron. This is kind of the point. If I have to choose blindly between a show that's made because Jeff Bezos wants to fund it and meddles with it personally or a show that Jeff's firm funds because some professionals believe it's going to attract paying viewers, my bet is on the latter.