Indeed, perhaps I should have said
There needs to be a way to support the creation of art.
There needs to be a way to support the creation of art.
A is not necessary for B if a single instance of B exists without A.
In colloquial terms it is frequently used to suggest a recommendation with an imperitive need.
Different things for the same word. Only the former can be used to determine if something is necessary, the latter is a subjective assertion and can have no proof either way.
It awards a few creators outsize rewards, but suppress creation of many more.
It does not petform the job that it is supposed to do.
Your entire thesis is false on its face. One does not need a big publisher to get published or make there work available. You've also offered no other alternative wherein the other works not sought by large publishers will somehow be afforded equivalent treatment so your proposition is just ridiculous if not outright ignorant.
Yeah, it's called "copyright."