If I have "Ajax" brand leather shoes sown by an East Asian sweatshop worker, who is the "creator" of the shoes, for purposes of benefiting from this system?

We are agreed that the company "Ajax" is not a creator, yes? Companies don't create - people create. Patented inventions are created by people, though patent ownership may be transferred to companies.

So does the monthly fee go to the skilled laborer who sewed the pieces together to give the final form? And also the laborers who turned cow hide into leather? As well as everyone involved in the shoe design? Does it also pass to their inheritors? For how long?

The house I owned was built in the 1950s by a local construction firm which is still around. There were several owners before me, including ones who remodeled and renovated it. Do all of them get part of my monthly fee? Or does it go to the woodworkers and plumbers and other builders who did the actual work?

I have books in my personal collection from authors who died decades ago. How do I reward Robert Heinlein in this "keep paying" scheme? Some of these books I bought used, so neither Heinlein nor his estate ever got a penny from me.

But that's fine, as the price point for the original sale already factored in the effect of the First Sale Doctrine.

Just like how the price of a car, house, bike, shows, etc. already factors in the reward for everyone involved, without needed an entirely new system to determine who the "creators" are, and how they get paid monthly.

And that's all assuming the fee distribution system itself is fair. We need only look to academic publishing to see unfair things can be once a system is entrenched.

The issue is a mismatch of incentives - customers wanting things for free - even if they aren’t actually customers. Vs businesses need/want for ongoing revenue (ideally for free too!).

Both sides are never going to be perfectly happy, but there are reasonable compromises. There are also extractive abusive psychos, of course.