It's not entirely clear where the intellectual property ends and where fair use begins. The recording industry managed to grow to the gigantic beast that it became in the latter half of the 20th century only because of a series of legal settlements with radio stations that decided it was just too much hassle to continue the fight in the courts, not to mention the potential of using exclusivity to force smaller competitors out of the business.
There are plenty ways that song writers and performance artists can make a living, such as charging fees for live concerts. Many indeed made living that way. It is not entirely clear why I should pay the publisher every time I use the library or flip through the magazines while I wait my turn at the hair salon; publishers do not get paid in either instances, why should the recording industry be any different? If it were clearly about intellectual property, then I should get all the CD's for free if they carry the songs I already had on vinyl, or only pay 1/12 the price when a CD contains only one song that was not in a previous CD of the same singer.
It is the recording industry and their lawyers that are getting a little too comfortable with entitlement. An entitlement that was made possible due to technology for about 60 years, and about to be made obsolete. It's no different from the buggy whip industry; at least the latter had a technologically created niche for about 2500 years, from the domestication of horses to the invention of automobile.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
