3 ms·
Wow, I avoided Patreon because I didn't trust that all the music being hosted was following proper licensing and compensation rules (e.g. looked like >50% of so
by 6stringmerc 11y ago
Wow, I avoided Patreon because I didn't trust that all the music being hosted was following proper licensing and compensation rules (e.g. looked like >50% of songs were covers), so this is kind of a double shock to me about how they ran their operation.
Believe it or not, this re-inforces my commitment to SoundCloud, which isn't monetized (yet), thereby keeping listeners' financial information off the table for the present.
- griffinmb 11y agoI believe you are thinking of a different platform. Patreon is a Kickstarter-like site, but with a monthly pledge. It is not for music hosting.
- 6stringmerc 11y agoNo, I'm not mistaken, at all. I'm very clear on what I understand about Patreon. If you want, you can probably get into the hacked data and see my email warning them that by being a financial conduit they were not abiding by Safe Harbors with respect to the real rights owners. It may not have "hosted" the music, but if you click on the music page, what do you see? Music videos. Then Patreon was the method to give those people money. People who may or may not have secured the proper licenses and paid the original artists. Also, if I was an artist on the site, my personal information would be part of that dump - SSN, etc - so my reluctance to engage with them was prudent. Edit: Downvoting my observations? I guess there are more people here that don't understand copyright than I figure, oh well.