If an artist receives a public subsidy to support work on a specific project -- e. g. , making a film -- and if this project then proves successful enough to allow the artist to repay the subsidy, is the artist morally obliged to do so? The answer is clearly yes, since the money returned to the agency distributing the subsidies will be welcome as a source of support for other artists deserving of public subsidies. The passage tries to establish an artist's obligation by arguing that ['acting this way would allow others to obtain a benefit such as the one that this artist has obtained in the past', 'this person had in fact, at an earlier time, made a tacit promise to act this way', "this person has benefited from other people's acting in just this way in the past", 'this person, by acting this way, would provide general benefits with a value exceeding the cost to the person of acting this way']