Browsing open culture I realised there is enough free content to last several life times … why do you think people still pay for content like books, music, movies if the classics are good and free? Is it a marketing problem ?
I think that it is partially a matter of relevance. For instance, there are vast newspaper and magazine archives which are free to read, but they don't have the same relevance as (eg) the latest New York Times articles. (Not that they are without value by any means, but reading them serves a different purpose).
Perhaps a better example would be someone in the 60's choosing to listen to an old Andrew Sisters record, or purchase a new Bob Dylan LP. The Andrew Sisters (as fun and lovely as their music is) would not speak to that present moment in the same way that Bob Dylan would.
Many aspects of art and culture are timeless, but many are not. There will always be a demand for new works to respond to the current day.
The classics generally aren't as good. There are exceptions (e.g. Star Wars) but old films generally have terrible pacing. Film making skills have not stood still.
The only thing that hasn't got better is speech clarity which is often terrible in modern films.
I watched Battleship Potemkin the other day. Sure, some of it is a bit pokey compared to modern films, but the editing doesn't drag and there aren't many films in history with better shot composition.
