4 ms·

> The sustainable path is commission-based works which could extend to patronage I'd be curious to see how this would play out - maybe it'd be great, I dunno.

> The sustainable path is commission-based works which could extend to patronage I'd be curious to see how this would play out - maybe it'd be great, I dunno. I do wonder, though, if approaches like this discourage people from paying and instead encourages hedging their bets to see if everyone else pays. For example, if there is a Kickstarter for a movie idea you find interesting, but you know that once the movie is made that you can get a copy for free (since there is no control over media in this model), you are incentivized to wait and see if it will get funded without you. Similarly, without any content control, there is little incentive for anyone to sign up for streaming services, so relying on them for funding doesn't seem like it'd work either.

tenebrisalietum 5y ago
> I do wonder, though, if approaches like this discourage people from paying and instead encourages hedging their bets to see if everyone else pays. Possibly, but for the people who really want it, they'll pay, and exactly two entities should be controlling this whole apparatus - the people who want it and the creators, not advertising or bloated-overhead distribution pyramids. If it doesn't work out, it doesn't. No, it's not going to produce the same volume of output as mass-market music, movies and TV that we have currently. Some people who are very passive media consumers may miss the old days and refuse to consume media that isn't handed to them on a silver platter, but the old days are dying anyway. US culture could be fracturing to the point where mass-market movies and TV may be impossible, something that was really obvious at least in music in the early 90's. > Similarly, without any content control, there is little incentive for anyone to sign up for streaming services This is only true if the experience is much worse than torrents, filesharing programs etc. and if people know someone who can get that in their preferred viewing/listening format. If there were no such thing as music copyright I'd still pay for a service where I can have a guarantee of getting specific music I want rather than rely on the goodwill of someone with that song to be connected on a p2p network.

tenebrisalietum 5y ago

> I do wonder, though, if approaches like this discourage people from paying and instead encourages hedging their bets to see if everyone else pays. Possibly, but for the people who really want it, they'll pay, and exactly two entities should be controlling this whole apparatus - the people who want it and the creators, not advertising or bloated-overhead distribution pyramids. If it doesn't work out, it doesn't. No, it's not going to produce the same volume of output as mass-market music, movies and TV that we have currently. Some people who are very passive media consumers may miss the old days and refuse to consume media that isn't handed to them on a silver platter, but the old days are dying anyway. US culture could be fracturing to the point where mass-market movies and TV may be impossible, something that was really obvious at least in music in the early 90's. > Similarly, without any content control, there is little incentive for anyone to sign up for streaming services This is only true if the experience is much worse than torrents, filesharing programs etc. and if people know someone who can get that in their preferred viewing/listening format. If there were no such thing as music copyright I'd still pay for a service where I can have a guarantee of getting specific music I want rather than rely on the goodwill of someone with that song to be connected on a p2p network.