What? That'd mean 99% of artists are touring musicians giving live performances. Moviemakers, authors, graphic designers, stone masons, song writers, ... Not

What? That'd mean 99% of artists are touring musicians giving live performances. Moviemakers, authors, graphic designers, stone masons, song writers, ... Not every artists is a musician. Not every musician performs in venues to such an extent that it makes up most or all of their revenue. Not every musicians output lends themselves to live performances, so they don't do them. I'd be surprised if even 10% of artists in the EU or US are making their revenue as live musicians. Whatever the number, it ain't 99%. Brief anecdote, currently working on a personal project and have commissioned an artist to design a few icons. Was a great experience, fun to work with them, more than happy with the result. Exclusive exploitation/usage rights were only transferred after full compensation was received. If copyright were not a thing in both their and mine countries, screwing over commissioned artists would be even easier than it already and unfortunately tends to be (having done freelance work myself) as this idea that the artist retains their rights before that point wouldn't be the default and any protections/claims solely based on individual contracts. Copyright can be flawed, yes, but taking away the core that is artists having their creations protected by default, without needing to manually apply or otherwise seek protection, I feel that shouldn't happen. Copyright, even today, does have merit in my book, though the lobbying efforts by Disney and co. along with post War western Europe loving to just copy US legislation wholesale without reflection have extended copyright further then I feel it should have been.