[ccsnags]

Spending time on something people aren’t willing to pay for is always a waste of time, whether you’re writing a book or digging holes.

We need to stop assuming that having no copyright means that the work cannot be monetized. It just can’t be monetized as if it was a physical object or service rendered. Vinyl records, tee shirts, patronage, book signings, lectures, anything that isn’t copyright dependent can be monetized easily.

The fans of art are aware that paying for it will help create more art they like. This is a personal connection that the fan has with the artist and keeps the art accessible for the casuals.

[falcolas]

We had that once upon a time (the original version of Patronage), and it resulted in some, but not very much, artwork in the grand scheme of things. Nowhere near the amount we enjoy today with our spare-change subscriptions.

Copyright also allows more creators to create without requiring them to be a live personality as well; to split their time between creating and hustling for money.

[donovanian]

> and it resulted in some, but not very much, artwork in the grand scheme of things

I'm not sure I follow, my understanding is that patronage, say from the Medici family, led to a proliferation of art.