Because two large forms of art are locked away using copyright by legacy companies unwilling to innovate. Those legacy companies seem to be trying their hardest to kill off the two "newest" outlets for that media.
And physical art only has worth because of its scarcity.
Bingo. Music and video. The services being Netflix and Spotify. I don't like their model, I would rather own the content, but that doesn't mean I want to see them run into the ground. The industries seem to want to stunt them.
Video content is split between several services and locked into regions. All of it comes with DRM and as far as I know all of it is streamed.
Music is fairing a little better. Most popular music is sold my most stores. I think all of it is DRM free these days. However music is being pulled off Spotify due to moaning about how little per play the copyright holders recieve. There are some dodgy stories emerging about "back room deals" to try to kill off free content on various services.
On the creating-art side: artistic works are tricky to sell compared to problem-solving goods (try defining the benefits vs features of, say, a print of Wheat Field With Crows), and it's a field where demand is frequently outstripped by supply.
I've worked in movies for 20 years and those are the two biggest problems that keep hitting me.
On the helping-artists side: There's plenty of space within the film world for startups, and plenty of startups or small tech companies. Most of them are hardware-based, though.
Art : relative to art exhibitions, museums, the way people get access to Art (painting, photo, video, etc... the more traditional art support), buy/consume/share Art, etc...
And physical art only has worth because of its scarcity.