I think I'm in the same boat as you, but can you articulate the 'why' behind that sentiment? (saying it's "on principle" could also be a way to not have to address that question, haha)
As in, if someone created something and you derive value (utility, enjoyment, etc.) from it, what is the basis for at some point no longer providing compensation for that utility?
FWIW, I haven't come up with a completely convincing answer, and yet I still feel like you do! Maybe there is no firm justification for terminating compensation, but instead it's more of an idea instilled by the culture, that after X years, the thing you created becomes owned by society at large just for the greater good, or maybe in recognition that your work came about because of prior accomplishments from others, or that as a society we want ongoing creativity and not stagnation.
