When it comes to a catalog search, all libraries to, in fact, use keywords. We call them subject headings. However, there still needs to be a method for arranging the physical materials on the shelves in a way that people can browse if they want to. That's were systems like Dewey come into play.
If that's your impression, I'm wondering when was the last time you were in a public, rather than an academic, library. LCC is a more complex system normally used for very large collections, like university holdings. It's overkill for places like the one-room neighborhood branch I work at.
Dewey is being updated regularly, including such things as the 30 or so years they spent trying to figure out where books about computers should go, and there's talk of changing the 200s (religion) so that 80% of the numbers do not solely belong to Christianity.
That said, most librarians would much prefer if OCLC issued the DDC updates under a more open license (and charged less to access the information).
She is making a new movie. It's called Seder Masochism and does with Judaism something a bit similar to what she did with Hinduism in Sita. At least, that's how I understand it. She's been posting little bits of work-in-progress on her site for months now.
Money is a stand-in for finite goods for the purpose of exchange. Using something infinite to stand-in for finite goods defeats the purpose. Information's purpose in to enlighten or entertain. Copying aids this purpose. Your analogy doesn't work.
"In fact, Paul noted that the data indicated that there was little support for the under-use of the public domain works as almost all of them were in print, compared to around 75% of the copyright works."
Sounds like a good thing for the public domain books to me.
Please do us all a favor and look up the American Library Association, particularly their stances an such things of intellectual freedom. Give yourself a bit of background on the typical views held by librarians and stop embarrassing yourself.