I don’t understand why people seem to think that having a monetary incentive to do something taints it somehow. Rewarding good behavior is half of justice. If someone writes books that many people really like, they’re doing a good deed and in my view should be rewarded.

Another thing you might find in your dreams is a world where people can live a comfortable life without working. I’d like that world, and I’m sure a lot of good art, music, blog posts, etc. would come from it. But I don’t see why you’d actively want people who produce those things to not be rewarded for it.

If you agree that allowing more people to have access to certain information is a net good, and that a adding financial barrier to access reduces the amount of people that can access it, then you agree that making information contingent on payment is strictly negative.

The problem is that under our current "make money or die" societal model, if you optimized for net good you'd end up starving on the streets.

Good art tends to sell for little to the artist, only becoming valuable once some rich person decides they want to sell it as expensive. The good artist does it as "the starving artist"

Similarly, it's big corporations like Spotify that benefit from music copyrights. Musicians make their money by selling your tickets