I don't necessarily disagree with you, just thinking out loud.
When you "buy" a CD/MP3/what-have-you, you're buying a license to that song, not "the song", which would be much, much more expensive. In fact, it's difficult to figure out how much the song is worth up-front, which is why there are generally licensing deals. That way the artist gets compensated according to how well the song does: if a lot of people like it, they make a lot of money. If nobody likes it, they make no money. Seems fair to me.
I guess a more accurate analogy would be if you designed a specific type of product and paid a carpenter to make it. Then you see him open a store that sells that item to a million people for 10x what you paid him, even though he directly ripped off your designs. He's profiting off of your work & ideas, with no compensation to you. Obviously this assumes that it's a novel idea, etc, but I think it's a bit more accurate.
Made by <Creator> + Enjoyed By <Person> = Endless Money for <Creator>
I might enjoying staring at a city skyline too, but that doesn't mean that I need to pay royalties to each and every architect that designed those buildings.
> if a lot of people like it, they make a lot of money. If nobody likes it, they make no money. Seems fair to me.
But for how long? 100+ years after the author is dead and buried? Seems a bit extreme.