This seems like an incredible naive way of thinking about how artists should be rewarded for their work.
> music streaming services have to spend most of their money on artists that performed many decades ago, otherwise no one will buy it
Music streaming services should spend their money on artists their customers are listening to, however old that music happens to be.
> however old
Eh, I don't think there's a very convincing argument that the world is better off paying artists for things that were made more than 50 years ago.
(Yes I know the person above said 10, I think 10 is too aggressive.)
Probably depends on whether or not they’re still alive after whatever arbitrary time period and some other factors, sure