3 ms·

In my mind kickstarter.com is the solution to the intelectual property problem. How can, knowledge workers, for instance musicians, earn money in the 21. centur

by FrojoS 15y ago

In my mind kickstarter.com is the solution to the intelectual property problem. How can, knowledge workers, for instance musicians, earn money in the 21. century? Simple, charge upfront before publishing. Imagine a popular band like U2 would ask for the money, they expect from their next album, upfront. I think, their fans, including me, would do what ever it takes to raise that money together. Et voila, you can still become rich as musician without mega concerts or a police state. I've been talking about this solution with my friends for years. We never made it happen. Now kickstarter.com is here. But I'm still waiting for a large adaptation in industries like music or software and video games. Is it just a question of time and promotion or am I'm overlooking something important? PS: I posted this a few seconds ago at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2723374 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2723374 but then realized it would fit better here.

andrewflnr 15y ago
That does sound like an interesting model. Producers would, I suppose, initially have to establish their reputations by releasing things for free. The dynamics of choosing prices would be completely different, more like selling equity. One thing that would worry me: a lot of people would have to be involved in getting a piece to a point where it could be sold. How would it be protected while all these people are looking at it and working on it? Also, if you work out one of these deals with a publisher, and transmit it over the Internet, are you legally protected against people stealing it en route?
- FrojoS 15y ago
  That does sound like an interesting model. Producers would, I suppose, initially have to establish their reputations by releasing things for free. Yes. One thing that would worry me: a lot of people would have to be involved in getting a piece to a point where it could be sold. How would it be protected while all these people are looking at it and working on it? Based on trust, just like today. How is this different from how music, books, games etc. are produced now? Also, if you work out one of these deals with a publisher, and transmit it over the Internet, are you legally protected against people stealing it en route? Not sure if you got me. No publisher required. Its direct b2c. Just like kickstarter.com works today. I'm only missing the "big fish". And no one could "steal" it. Once its published its published. Free like any information thats published into our world today. A free license like BSD would be appropriate.
  - andrewflnr 15y ago
    > Based on trust, just like today. How is this different from how music, books, games etc. are produced now? Currently, if someone violates your trust, by releasing their own version of a song you wrote, for example, you can sue them. It's not clear to me that this would be the case in a copyright-free world. You would have to explicitly have to make a contract with everyone who ever comes in contact with your work before it's ready. That would be tiresome, at best. And it doesn't cover people who steal/stumble across pieces of it in progress. There is no way I would not be working on something before it was paid for. Before I even put an idea up for funding, I would have notes and such. If someone takes these and makes a derivative work, I get to prosecute them for... stealing paper, because I'm not allowed to claim the information content of the paper as my own. Artists not skilled in secrecy are going to be in serious trouble. > Not sure if you got me. No publisher required. Its direct b2c. Just like kickstarter.com works today. I'm only missing the "big fish" No, I didn't quite understand that model. So if there is any large-scale physical production, say printing books or burning CD's, that will be handled by third parties and the artist won't have anything to do with it? And people who want the physical form will have to pay two parties? One problem you'll run into is that everyone benefits equally no matter how much they put in, including those who didn't put anything in. That sorta sucks for anyone who put in a lot, who then watch those who didn't help at all benefit from their money. You're essentially relying on charity, and that's a worrisome business model. I wonder if the reliance on idealism would have a positive effect on the quality of work produced. I need to think about this more. And I should probably give Kickstarter a try for one of my own projects.
    - FrojoS 15y ago
      No, I didn't quite understand that model. So if there is any large-scale physical production, say printing books or burning CD's, that will be handled by third parties and the artist won't have anything to do with it? And people who want the physical form will have to pay two parties? Whats wrong about paying two parties? Actually, most people would never pay the first party, because the work is already released. And the profit margin for the second party (publisher) would be small at best. First, because there will be a lot of competition and second because information delivery is almost free today. Why burn CD's in 2011? Download the mp3's and play them wherever you want. Since I have a Kindle, I don't really want printed books anymore either. I also printed a lot of free books at the local copy shop in the past. The problem with trust, I believe is not a bigger one than it is today. It should actually be smaller. Where is the problem if I paid someone over kickstarter.com to do XYZ and then XYZ gets published by some bad guy earlier than planed?

by FrojoS 15y ago

andrewflnr 15y ago

That does sound like an interesting model. Producers would, I suppose, initially have to establish their reputations by releasing things for free. The dynamics of choosing prices would be completely different, more like selling equity. One thing that would worry me: a lot of people would have to be involved in getting a piece to a point where it could be sold. How would it be protected while all these people are looking at it and working on it? Also, if you work out one of these deals with a publisher, and transmit it over the Internet, are you legally protected against people stealing it en route?

FrojoS 15y ago
That does sound like an interesting model. Producers would, I suppose, initially have to establish their reputations by releasing things for free. Yes. One thing that would worry me: a lot of people would have to be involved in getting a piece to a point where it could be sold. How would it be protected while all these people are looking at it and working on it? Based on trust, just like today. How is this different from how music, books, games etc. are produced now? Also, if you work out one of these deals with a publisher, and transmit it over the Internet, are you legally protected against people stealing it en route? Not sure if you got me. No publisher required. Its direct b2c. Just like kickstarter.com works today. I'm only missing the "big fish". And no one could "steal" it. Once its published its published. Free like any information thats published into our world today. A free license like BSD would be appropriate.
- andrewflnr 15y ago
  > Based on trust, just like today. How is this different from how music, books, games etc. are produced now? Currently, if someone violates your trust, by releasing their own version of a song you wrote, for example, you can sue them. It's not clear to me that this would be the case in a copyright-free world. You would have to explicitly have to make a contract with everyone who ever comes in contact with your work before it's ready. That would be tiresome, at best. And it doesn't cover people who steal/stumble across pieces of it in progress. There is no way I would not be working on something before it was paid for. Before I even put an idea up for funding, I would have notes and such. If someone takes these and makes a derivative work, I get to prosecute them for... stealing paper, because I'm not allowed to claim the information content of the paper as my own. Artists not skilled in secrecy are going to be in serious trouble. > Not sure if you got me. No publisher required. Its direct b2c. Just like kickstarter.com works today. I'm only missing the "big fish" No, I didn't quite understand that model. So if there is any large-scale physical production, say printing books or burning CD's, that will be handled by third parties and the artist won't have anything to do with it? And people who want the physical form will have to pay two parties? One problem you'll run into is that everyone benefits equally no matter how much they put in, including those who didn't put anything in. That sorta sucks for anyone who put in a lot, who then watch those who didn't help at all benefit from their money. You're essentially relying on charity, and that's a worrisome business model. I wonder if the reliance on idealism would have a positive effect on the quality of work produced. I need to think about this more. And I should probably give Kickstarter a try for one of my own projects.
  - FrojoS 15y ago
    No, I didn't quite understand that model. So if there is any large-scale physical production, say printing books or burning CD's, that will be handled by third parties and the artist won't have anything to do with it? And people who want the physical form will have to pay two parties? Whats wrong about paying two parties? Actually, most people would never pay the first party, because the work is already released. And the profit margin for the second party (publisher) would be small at best. First, because there will be a lot of competition and second because information delivery is almost free today. Why burn CD's in 2011? Download the mp3's and play them wherever you want. Since I have a Kindle, I don't really want printed books anymore either. I also printed a lot of free books at the local copy shop in the past. The problem with trust, I believe is not a bigger one than it is today. It should actually be smaller. Where is the problem if I paid someone over kickstarter.com to do XYZ and then XYZ gets published by some bad guy earlier than planed?