There's a publisher, who did boring things like pay the cover artist, buy the plastic and vinyl, pay the printer. The record came out, they had a bunch of copies, and then two days later Bowie died. If they're exclusive right to sell they music disappears, they overpaid Bowie.

The cost of publishing a music online after it's been produced is close to zero nowadays. I could see how that argument was relevant 30 years ago though.

And the initial costs are similar to any other non-copyright related work, paid per service.

Because the costs to publish online are zero there would be innumerable other copies of the work posted, meaning the initial outlay for the studio time etc cannot be recouped.

It's exactly like any other work, your plumber doesn't receive royalties whenever you use your bathroom, those costs should be paid upfront.

Yep! The costs to press vinyl and print sleeves and market the work _are_ paid upfront. So cutting off the revenue stream unexpectedly means no more expensive projects for old artists