I suppose I did move the goalposts, however unintentional it may have been. Yes, what I'm really defending here is the basic premise of copyright. I have no interest in defending copyright that effectively lasts forever, or that has such wide scope that we see billion-dollar lawsuits over work that shouldn't have been covered by copyright in the first place, or other similarly obvious abuses from the relatively recent past.

However, if the underlying question we're asking here is still whether copyright adversely affects other potential economic models for creating and distributing new works, I think my original point remains valid. How would the scenarios you mentioned support alternative model(s) that would be more attractive to creators than what we have (or at least, should have) under some sort of copyright scheme?