Why should the sculptor allow everyone to sell his sculptures without paying
him anything?
There are reasons she could want to do that. I could cite the famous artist
Nina Paley. But Gwenn Seemel is closer to a sculptor:
http://www.gwennseemel.com/index.php/copyright/
Anyway, the sculptor *can* "allow everyone to sell his sculptures without
paying him anything" but he does not *have to*. Like I wrote before, I do not
consider that forbidding commercial uses of artistic work is unethical.
Now, why should other be allowed to sell the product and profit without
asking or giving anything to the author?
They do not *have to* be allowed to "sell the product" because it is
nonfunctional (not because of the effort put by the artist; the same could be
said of free software developers). They *can* do that if the author allows it
though. The artist decides and either way is fine. What is not OK in my book
is to forbid non-commercial sharing.
