"Our opinions diverge here. If the public does not need/want to modify the
work --- only artists do (again, the hairdresser can be a music artist in her
free time, she is not acting as one when running her haircutting business)
--- then the freedoms of the public are not harmed when it is not authorized
to modify the work. Here is the "distinction".
You could say the same thing about software. And you'd be just as wrong.
"I am not talking about original works (including mash-ups and remixes) that
reuse previous works."
Then you're not talking about anything then, because everything is already
derivative. I covered that earlier with that link to the Question Copyright
website.
"Again, I am talking about including a photograph's picture in a news
article, a music in an advertisement, ... or simply, and more commonly,
commercial redistribution of exact copies."
Including a photograph in a picture may or may not require copyright
permission. It all depends on the context. But ignoring that, selling copies
doesn't work anymore. *Especially* for digital things. It did when making
copies was hard but it isn't hard anymore. Copying is incredibly easy. *snaps
fingers* There - I just made 100,000 copies. Copying will only ever get
easier. It is better to adapt to the modern world and find other ways to fund
things that don't rely on the making and selling of copies rather than trying
to push to restrict the public's rights in today's world. Crowdfunding is one
way but by no means is it the only way. Business models based on the selling
of copies will fail and are already failing (look at Big Media resorting to
lawsuits over copies to prop up their defunct business model that's built on
the making and selling of copies.)
"it gives other opportunities to live from one's art"
When the public has already paid for it in advance, say via a modern system
like crowdfunding just for an example, what's the argument to be made to
continue keeping it under restriction after that? It can't be money because
that part's already addressed via the successful crowdfunding. And if it's
paid for with public money it should belong to the public.
