I heartily endorse this opinion or viewpoint.
After accepting this as true, we must confront why "intellectual property" in the form of taxpayer-funded enforcement of ownership of an idea exists.
Which only makes me wonder further if the underlying IP is really valuable or not.
So I guess I must concede the point. At least in pop music, it could be argued that the value of the work alone is small, and almost all of the value is created by third parties. You gave me something to think about.
A few examples:
Official torrent with tip jar, purchase here info included. One could host this torrent too.
Download here page with ads and opportunity to buy, pay what one wants to pay.
Pay for copy, or stream it anytime from our nice server...
Social media, coupled with variations on the above can get word out quickly.
These things, and the many variations on them possible, are of least advantage to the big players, and can be a serious advantage for new, small, up and coming players.
Piracy does not eliminate any sales opportunities. And it can often garner attention where buying that attention can be otherwise costly.
Being relevant opens a lot of potential doors.
I think you've accurately captured the state of the world for the vast majority of owners of IP who wish to profit from their work. It is extremely rare for royalties to produce any significant percentage of revenues for artists. Most revenue comes from merchandise, live performances, custom work, and so on.
With this in mind, I submit that the actual value of IP in most cases is close to zero.