36 ms·

On the other hand, there's SpiceDAO who spent three million dollars to buy a copy of Dune sketchbook (whose starting price was 25k), and pretend it gives them t

On the other hand, there's SpiceDAO who spent three million dollars to buy a copy of Dune sketchbook (whose starting price was 25k), and pretend it gives them the right to produce new IP based on Dune. So what does that tell you about decentralized decision making other than "people are stupid"?

miracle2k 5y ago
Did they pretend and/or think this? The widely shared tweet I have seen simply stated that they want to develop IP based on Dune. It did not say that permission to do so is derived from the book. > (whose starting price was 25k) That is how auctions work. The only concern with such setups is that information about the amount of money available to such a DAO bidder is public knowledge and thus can be exploited.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  The tweet is this: https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO/status/1482404318347153413 https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO/status/1482404318347153413 And I'll quote it in it's entirety for posterity: --- start quote --- We won the auction for €2.66M. Now our mission is to: 1. Make the book public (to the extent permitted by law) 2. Produce an original animated limited series inspired by the book and sell it to a streaming service 3. Support derivative projects from the community --- end quote --- Since then they've backtracked saying that they are looking to develop "completely original IP", but that raises the question "why spend money on the Dune book then?".
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    Ah yes. And don't forget their Q&A series of tweets. I'm linking to the best one: https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO/status/1484285677646729219?s=20 https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO/status/1484285677646729219?s... --- start quote --- Q: Are you aware that purchasing the book does not give you its copyright? A: Yes. After two months of outreach, conversations with former business partners and consultations with legal counsel we were not able to reach an agreement with any of the rights holders... --- end quote --- And yet, they still were "hell bent on buying the book at any cost". Now that they realized they have nothing but an expensive book on their hand, they are "developing a new animated series" that they have no money for. You can see the hilarious exchange here: https://forum.spicedao.xyz/t/original-series-package-strategy/107 https://forum.spicedao.xyz/t/original-series-package-strateg... "all you need to approach a streaming service for a sale that would finance the production is a package and not a finished product" and "We were quoted $500K USD for a writer’s room early on and quickly abandoned the thought" They spent 2.6 million dollars on book. This would've comfortably covered a huge chink of an original animated series.
    - miracle2k 5y ago
      It seems to me that the communication both in the original tweet and the subsequent communication is consistent: - They did not think it gives them to copyright. - They want to create /original/ IP merely /inspired/ by the book. - These are two separate ventures. I have no position on whether their decision to spend 2.6 million dollars on it is smart or not; people can ultimately buy what they want, and if people fundraised 2.6 million to buy a book, and the decision makers therefore had the authority to spend as much, I see no problem.
      - raesene9 5y ago
        The only reason they should have spent $2.6m at auction is, if there was another bidder taking them that high. Short of someone literally bidding against them with the foreknowledge of their maximum bid, it seems very unlikely that anyone else would have gone close to that number from the $35k expected price. A more sane approach if they realised that someone was bidding the up would be to duck out of that auction and by any of the other copies of the book that exist, likely for faaar less than $2.6m
        Cederfjard 5y ago
        Due to the nature of the DAO, their maximum bid was known beforehand, and I don’t know if there was a mechanism to bail out at that point, and with short notice. Edit: Except the person/people tasked with doing the actual bidding making an executive decision to, but would that have been within their mandate?
      - Cederfjard 5y ago
        But why buy the book, for any amount? It was already available scanned to everyone for free online. The purchase literally didn’t further any of their stated goals, unless they thought it would give them rights to the IP.
        miracle2k 5y ago
        It seems clear that the purchase of the book was a purpose in and of itself.
- weego 5y ago
  To correct some information, the 25k-35k euros was the estimated price even inflated for the success of the film. The book is rare, but not unique. You don't pay 100x est to own a physical copy of a non-unique book, a scan of which is available in full online, for 100x without thinking there is some additional benefit to winning. Even if you remove the 'they thought it would give them IP rights' stupidity defense you're left with blowing 100x estimated value of other people's money stupidity situation, which is just as bad. You're just swapping one stupidity that should discredit them from running any kind of DAO for another that should do the same.
aaron695 5y ago
eqmvii 5y ago
> So what does that tell you about decentralized decision making other than "people are stupid"? That people are also greedy, and prone to motivated reasoning.
j4yav 5y ago
Are they still planning to mint NFTs of the book and then burn it to increase the NFT price?
- eledra 5y ago
  [dead]
  - miracle2k 5y ago
    This is a proposal.
ramphastidae 5y ago
I’m shocked people believe such a simple story … they didn’t mistakenly pay 30x the value of the asset based on a legal misunderstanding … it’s money laundering.
- splintercell 5y ago
  For this to be money laundering (and not a donation) they need to be on the other side of the trade.
  - ShamelessC 5y ago
    Is this not trivial to do by simply participating in the DAO with anonymized wallets?

miracle2k 5y ago

Did they pretend and/or think this? The widely shared tweet I have seen simply stated that they want to develop IP based on Dune. It did not say that permission to do so is derived from the book. > (whose starting price was 25k) That is how auctions work. The only concern with such setups is that information about the amount of money available to such a DAO bidder is public knowledge and thus can be exploited.

dmitriid 5y ago
The tweet is this: https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO/status/1482404318347153413 https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO/status/1482404318347153413 And I'll quote it in it's entirety for posterity: --- start quote --- We won the auction for €2.66M. Now our mission is to: 1. Make the book public (to the extent permitted by law) 2. Produce an original animated limited series inspired by the book and sell it to a streaming service 3. Support derivative projects from the community --- end quote --- Since then they've backtracked saying that they are looking to develop "completely original IP", but that raises the question "why spend money on the Dune book then?".
- dmitriid 5y ago
  Ah yes. And don't forget their Q&A series of tweets. I'm linking to the best one: https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO/status/1484285677646729219?s=20 https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO/status/1484285677646729219?s... --- start quote --- Q: Are you aware that purchasing the book does not give you its copyright? A: Yes. After two months of outreach, conversations with former business partners and consultations with legal counsel we were not able to reach an agreement with any of the rights holders... --- end quote --- And yet, they still were "hell bent on buying the book at any cost". Now that they realized they have nothing but an expensive book on their hand, they are "developing a new animated series" that they have no money for. You can see the hilarious exchange here: https://forum.spicedao.xyz/t/original-series-package-strategy/107 https://forum.spicedao.xyz/t/original-series-package-strateg... "all you need to approach a streaming service for a sale that would finance the production is a package and not a finished product" and "We were quoted $500K USD for a writer’s room early on and quickly abandoned the thought" They spent 2.6 million dollars on book. This would've comfortably covered a huge chink of an original animated series.
  - miracle2k 5y ago
    It seems to me that the communication both in the original tweet and the subsequent communication is consistent: - They did not think it gives them to copyright. - They want to create /original/ IP merely /inspired/ by the book. - These are two separate ventures. I have no position on whether their decision to spend 2.6 million dollars on it is smart or not; people can ultimately buy what they want, and if people fundraised 2.6 million to buy a book, and the decision makers therefore had the authority to spend as much, I see no problem.
    - raesene9 5y ago
      The only reason they should have spent $2.6m at auction is, if there was another bidder taking them that high. Short of someone literally bidding against them with the foreknowledge of their maximum bid, it seems very unlikely that anyone else would have gone close to that number from the $35k expected price. A more sane approach if they realised that someone was bidding the up would be to duck out of that auction and by any of the other copies of the book that exist, likely for faaar less than $2.6m
      - Cederfjard 5y ago
        Due to the nature of the DAO, their maximum bid was known beforehand, and I don’t know if there was a mechanism to bail out at that point, and with short notice. Edit: Except the person/people tasked with doing the actual bidding making an executive decision to, but would that have been within their mandate?
    - Cederfjard 5y ago
      But why buy the book, for any amount? It was already available scanned to everyone for free online. The purchase literally didn’t further any of their stated goals, unless they thought it would give them rights to the IP.
      - miracle2k 5y ago
        It seems clear that the purchase of the book was a purpose in and of itself.
weego 5y ago
To correct some information, the 25k-35k euros was the estimated price even inflated for the success of the film. The book is rare, but not unique. You don't pay 100x est to own a physical copy of a non-unique book, a scan of which is available in full online, for 100x without thinking there is some additional benefit to winning. Even if you remove the 'they thought it would give them IP rights' stupidity defense you're left with blowing 100x estimated value of other people's money stupidity situation, which is just as bad. You're just swapping one stupidity that should discredit them from running any kind of DAO for another that should do the same.

aaron695 5y ago

eqmvii 5y ago

> So what does that tell you about decentralized decision making other than "people are stupid"? That people are also greedy, and prone to motivated reasoning.

j4yav 5y ago

Are they still planning to mint NFTs of the book and then burn it to increase the NFT price?

eledra 5y ago
[dead]
- miracle2k 5y ago
  This is a proposal.

ramphastidae 5y ago

I’m shocked people believe such a simple story … they didn’t mistakenly pay 30x the value of the asset based on a legal misunderstanding … it’s money laundering.

splintercell 5y ago
For this to be money laundering (and not a donation) they need to be on the other side of the trade.
- ShamelessC 5y ago
  Is this not trivial to do by simply participating in the DAO with anonymized wallets?