4 ms·

I am actually developing a platform to compete with pateon. And the author is quite naive in his complaints. You cannot do business and be anonymous. The tax m

by hknmtt 3y ago

I am actually developing a platform to compete with pateon. And the author is quite naive in his complaints. You cannot do business and be anonymous. The tax man would eat you alive. At least outside of USA. You also need a license as sole proprietor or be incorporated as a company in order to make repetitive sales and not one-offs. So again, no anonymity whatsoever. "by works" payment model is illegal. You can receive donations or have subscriptions or pay per view but you cannot "maybe deliver", "deliver maybe one work, maybe ten". Again, illegal as fuck. "Non quid pro quo patronage" - again, donations solve this. They are legal and easy without any hustle, as long as the payee is aware what is the purpose of that payment. "api / audience relation system" - well, i am trying to run a business, why in the world would i give api access to third parties without being able to monetize it? each api call costs me resources. nothing is free. not to mention that giving access to api might go against my financial business altogether by moving some financial transactions out of my business into foreign business that is monetizing my api. Author is very naive in his complaints in general. The red tape you have to go through these days for a simple(it's not a rocket science) website is astronomical. The technological issues(like finding a bank with an actual api that works and does not charge you per payment is close to impossible) too are unending hurdles being thrown at you form left and right and the bigtech-monopolized internet does not want you in it competing with their services or NOT using their services and infrastructure to build yours. You think streaming video is free? Try finding a place to host the video and send it over the network for amount that your income can cover and allow you still to make a profit. Good luck. Yes, i have solved all these issues. But it is so damn hard, that these complaints don't even scratch the surface of how impossible it is to start something serious in this monopolized era of the internet and red tape. You just have no idea. You don't.

raincole 3y ago
If someone thinks they can have a competitive edge against existing market leader by 1) have an API 2) make UI faster, they probably lived in an echo chamber for too long and really need to spend more time with non-developer people. Perhaps their other points are valid. Admittedly I don't know enough to tell.
jaggederest 3y ago
> "by works" payment model is illegal. You can receive donations or have subscriptions or pay per view but you cannot "maybe deliver", "deliver maybe one work, maybe ten". Again, illegal as fuck. How can Patreon allow it then? It's a real, existing thing. If you don't deliver, you don't get paid.
- hknmtt 3y ago
  in that case, maybe i did not properly understood how the author describes that model.
  - Fargren 3y ago
    I don't know how to write this without sounding snarky, which is not my intention but: maybe if you are intending to build a Patreon competitor, you should look into how this model works. It's probably not a big source of their profit, and certainly a competitor can live without it. But as both a consumer and creator it's the only model I'm interested in. It really aligns everyone's incentives.
    - hknmtt 3y ago
      I am not trying to copy Patreon. I am merely implementing the general idea of selling your digital content online. That's all. If people like Patreon and their monetization channels, I am not here to try and steal them away. Not my intention whatsoever. I am doing a lot of things very differently to Patreon.
      - jasonlotito 3y ago
        > I am actually developing a platform to compete with pateon. And the author is quite naive in his complaints. > I am not trying to copy Patreon. I am merely implementing the general idea of selling your digital content online. That's all. You should stop posting, honestly. Either you tried to gather interest for your project by posting in a Patreon thread, or you've realized how little you actually know and you are backtracking. Best to cut your losses, revisit what you are working on, make sure you have a clear path and you've verified it's what customers want, and build something you can show before talking about it.
nivethan 3y ago
One note, I don’t think the author is saying that the person should be anonymous but rather the way they talk to their audience should be. In the backend they will be known but for the audience they have a specific name that doesn’t have to be their full government name.
- hknmtt 3y ago
  I get that but you cannot be selling anonymously as long as it is a way for you to make a living, fully or partially, and it is not a one time thing(like selling some used items on ebay or similar website). I cannot speak for all countries but I would say most have a law that requires you to get a sole proprietor license or incorporate as company when you are getting income from repeated transactions. Customers have various protections so they must know the identity of the seller. Not that they want to, mostly they don't, but by law they must be able to get that information, possible even receive an invoice that lists this information. Not to mention that if you are buying works for business purposes, VAT might get involved and other legal and tax complexities. If you are making a platform you must make it universally usable. Just because one creator does not like or is missing some thing, you just cannot bend the platform to suit his needs. It just does not work like that. Personally, I have solved the anonymity issue. It's not hard to do but it requires legal layering, which sounds way more complex than it actually is, but i don't want to get out my solution in here.
  - zztop44 3y ago
    I think part of Patreon’s value-add is solving these issues. And it’s not like this is unprecedented. In the music world there are artists who are anonymous but when you buy a record you’re buying it from retailer which is where you go if there are issues and a record label, who presumably knows the legal identity of the artist.
nikic 3y ago
> You cannot do business and be anonymous. The tax man would eat you alive. At least outside of USA. You also need a license as sole proprietor or be incorporated as a company in order to make repetitive sales and not one-offs. So again, no anonymity whatsoever. There is no anonymity between the creator and Patreon, or between Patreon and patrons. The anonymity is between the creator and the patrons. I don't see any reason why this would be illegal, especially as Patreon does this in countless jurisdictions. > "by works" payment model is illegal. You can receive donations or have subscriptions or pay per view but you cannot "maybe deliver", "deliver maybe one work, maybe ten". Again, illegal as fuck. This is a model that Patreon already supports (again in countless jurisdictions), so unless their legal counsel is completely incompetent it can hardly be "illegal as fuck".
- hknmtt 3y ago
  > There is no anonymity between the creator and Patreon, or between Patreon and patrons. The anonymity is between the creator and the patrons. that is exactly the problem. You have two relationships here: author -> patreon and author -> patrons. The first one is irrelevant, the second on is the problematic one. You cannot be anonymous in one case and not in another. That is not how business, law or taxes work - anywhere. Just because patrons do not want to know the legal identity does not mean it is legal to hide it. You could get sued for tax avoidance like that.
  - teraflop 3y ago
    Do you think it was equally illegal for publishers and bookstores to sell novels written by Richard Bachman, without revealing that that was actually a pseudonym for Stephen King?
    - hknmtt 3y ago
      "publishers" is the keyword here. You have answered your own question.
      - teraflop 3y ago
eichin 3y ago
The IRS and Patreon need to know who you are. Patrons don't. The article is pretty specific about the distinction. (Looks like the US is 30% of patreon's business, more than any other single country, so I'm reasonably comfortable acting like my US-specific response matters.) Likewise, are you claiming that the "by works" model that patreon supports today is illegal? As for the "non quid pro quo" case - as a patron I care about this one in particular - patreon does this (or at least only screws it up in minor ways), the article is just recommending that any alternative handle it too. Maybe your donation management approach handles this? Finally, "api access to third parties without being able to monetize it" - the request isn't so much for third party access, as first party - primarily for artists, maybe optionally for patrons. (This one is a little less important if you have a broad enough range of artist-CRM options, but really, noone has before, api support for developers is a great way to let other people fail fast so you don't have to...) Also, the API in question is something slightly less sophisticated than "a single google sheet per artist", it's not going to be that expensive. I'm definitely curious about what you come up with, especially if you get traction with artists - but only about half a dozen of the artists I support through patreon are outside the US anyway, so until you work out US support I'm probably not going to notice. Good luck, though.
- hknmtt 3y ago
  > The IRS and Patreon need to know who you are. Patrons don't. As i commended elsewhere, if Patreon acts as the publisher, then yes. The authors are merely sub-contractors and their relationship with patrons is quite different. > Likewise, are you claiming that the "by works" model that patreon supports today is illegal? As I commented elsewhere, I might not have understood what the author has been describing and misinterpreted it. The API question, based on your take, then needs to be expanded on. Too many variables here. Sound more to me like this is not an API question at all, but rather lack of functionality/forms/pages/lists on the front-end side? > I'm definitely curious about what you come up with, especially if you get traction with artists - but only about half a dozen of the artists I support through patreon are outside the US anyway, so until you work out US support I'm probably not going to notice. Good luck, though. It will have no geo-restriction so who ever comes will be welcome. Frankly, I am not looking to get millions of users. I will be satisfied if it pays for itself and people's salaries and author get alternative means of communicating with their fans, or the world, in this modern era of censorship and political correctness. My setup if very different from the one bigtech uses, so I hope that will be what will attract people there. I have been working on this for a year with about 5 month break. It will be out next year.
egypturnash 3y ago
"by works is illegal" I've been using Patreon this way since it launched in 2013, and I am pretty sure they have grown to the point where it is impossible for the only reason they get away with it is that they are too small for anyone to say "hey this is illegal, you have x months to stop doing this before we come down on you". "why would I give API access without being able to monetize it" It is worth noting that Patreon was created by a musician with the intent of being a service for artists/musicians/etc, and still occasionally acts like this instead of a purely profit-driven corporate entity whose primary duty is making its shareholders rich. The CEO is still that musician, though I think his musical output has fallen off a lot as "running a system of money pipes" took over his life. Patreon makes a lot of choices that look weird from a purely monetary viewpoint because of this.
- krisoft 3y ago
  > I think his musical output has fallen off a lot as "running a system of money pipes" took over his life Does not appear to be the case? Jack is pumping out music at an insane rate. If you mean quality wise, that is a lot harder to judge objectively. Subjectively I like his new stuff, and his new band the Scary Pockets is doing well popularity wise.
  - egypturnash 3y ago
    Oh he is? I just got as far as looking at his Bandcamp page, which hasn't been updated in years. I'm not into his music, just a happy client of the company he started to try and make more money than Youtube was willing to trickle down to him.
BlueTemplar 3y ago
You are confusing anonymity and pseudonymity. The author never mentioned anonymity, it wouldn't make any sense for a creator trying to develop a fanbase. (Which could be anonymous.) Hosting video, even yourself, has been a solved problem for years now : https://framablog.org/2022/12/13/peertube-v5-the-result-of-5-years-handcrafting/ https://framablog.org/2022/12/13/peertube-v5-the-result-of-5...

by hknmtt 3y ago

raincole 3y ago

If someone thinks they can have a competitive edge against existing market leader by 1) have an API 2) make UI faster, they probably lived in an echo chamber for too long and really need to spend more time with non-developer people. Perhaps their other points are valid. Admittedly I don't know enough to tell.

jaggederest 3y ago

> "by works" payment model is illegal. You can receive donations or have subscriptions or pay per view but you cannot "maybe deliver", "deliver maybe one work, maybe ten". Again, illegal as fuck. How can Patreon allow it then? It's a real, existing thing. If you don't deliver, you don't get paid.

hknmtt 3y ago
in that case, maybe i did not properly understood how the author describes that model.
- Fargren 3y ago
  I don't know how to write this without sounding snarky, which is not my intention but: maybe if you are intending to build a Patreon competitor, you should look into how this model works. It's probably not a big source of their profit, and certainly a competitor can live without it. But as both a consumer and creator it's the only model I'm interested in. It really aligns everyone's incentives.
  - hknmtt 3y ago
    I am not trying to copy Patreon. I am merely implementing the general idea of selling your digital content online. That's all. If people like Patreon and their monetization channels, I am not here to try and steal them away. Not my intention whatsoever. I am doing a lot of things very differently to Patreon.
    - jasonlotito 3y ago
      > I am actually developing a platform to compete with pateon. And the author is quite naive in his complaints. > I am not trying to copy Patreon. I am merely implementing the general idea of selling your digital content online. That's all. You should stop posting, honestly. Either you tried to gather interest for your project by posting in a Patreon thread, or you've realized how little you actually know and you are backtracking. Best to cut your losses, revisit what you are working on, make sure you have a clear path and you've verified it's what customers want, and build something you can show before talking about it.

nivethan 3y ago

One note, I don’t think the author is saying that the person should be anonymous but rather the way they talk to their audience should be. In the backend they will be known but for the audience they have a specific name that doesn’t have to be their full government name.

hknmtt 3y ago
I get that but you cannot be selling anonymously as long as it is a way for you to make a living, fully or partially, and it is not a one time thing(like selling some used items on ebay or similar website). I cannot speak for all countries but I would say most have a law that requires you to get a sole proprietor license or incorporate as company when you are getting income from repeated transactions. Customers have various protections so they must know the identity of the seller. Not that they want to, mostly they don't, but by law they must be able to get that information, possible even receive an invoice that lists this information. Not to mention that if you are buying works for business purposes, VAT might get involved and other legal and tax complexities. If you are making a platform you must make it universally usable. Just because one creator does not like or is missing some thing, you just cannot bend the platform to suit his needs. It just does not work like that. Personally, I have solved the anonymity issue. It's not hard to do but it requires legal layering, which sounds way more complex than it actually is, but i don't want to get out my solution in here.
- zztop44 3y ago
  I think part of Patreon’s value-add is solving these issues. And it’s not like this is unprecedented. In the music world there are artists who are anonymous but when you buy a record you’re buying it from retailer which is where you go if there are issues and a record label, who presumably knows the legal identity of the artist.

nikic 3y ago

> You cannot do business and be anonymous. The tax man would eat you alive. At least outside of USA. You also need a license as sole proprietor or be incorporated as a company in order to make repetitive sales and not one-offs. So again, no anonymity whatsoever. There is no anonymity between the creator and Patreon, or between Patreon and patrons. The anonymity is between the creator and the patrons. I don't see any reason why this would be illegal, especially as Patreon does this in countless jurisdictions. > "by works" payment model is illegal. You can receive donations or have subscriptions or pay per view but you cannot "maybe deliver", "deliver maybe one work, maybe ten". Again, illegal as fuck. This is a model that Patreon already supports (again in countless jurisdictions), so unless their legal counsel is completely incompetent it can hardly be "illegal as fuck".

hknmtt 3y ago
> There is no anonymity between the creator and Patreon, or between Patreon and patrons. The anonymity is between the creator and the patrons. that is exactly the problem. You have two relationships here: author -> patreon and author -> patrons. The first one is irrelevant, the second on is the problematic one. You cannot be anonymous in one case and not in another. That is not how business, law or taxes work - anywhere. Just because patrons do not want to know the legal identity does not mean it is legal to hide it. You could get sued for tax avoidance like that.
- teraflop 3y ago
  Do you think it was equally illegal for publishers and bookstores to sell novels written by Richard Bachman, without revealing that that was actually a pseudonym for Stephen King?
  - hknmtt 3y ago
    "publishers" is the keyword here. You have answered your own question.
    - teraflop 3y ago

eichin 3y ago

The IRS and Patreon need to know who you are. Patrons don't. The article is pretty specific about the distinction. (Looks like the US is 30% of patreon's business, more than any other single country, so I'm reasonably comfortable acting like my US-specific response matters.) Likewise, are you claiming that the "by works" model that patreon supports today is illegal? As for the "non quid pro quo" case - as a patron I care about this one in particular - patreon does this (or at least only screws it up in minor ways), the article is just recommending that any alternative handle it too. Maybe your donation management approach handles this? Finally, "api access to third parties without being able to monetize it" - the request isn't so much for third party access, as first party - primarily for artists, maybe optionally for patrons. (This one is a little less important if you have a broad enough range of artist-CRM options, but really, noone has before, api support for developers is a great way to let other people fail fast so you don't have to...) Also, the API in question is something slightly less sophisticated than "a single google sheet per artist", it's not going to be that expensive. I'm definitely curious about what you come up with, especially if you get traction with artists - but only about half a dozen of the artists I support through patreon are outside the US anyway, so until you work out US support I'm probably not going to notice. Good luck, though.

hknmtt 3y ago
> The IRS and Patreon need to know who you are. Patrons don't. As i commended elsewhere, if Patreon acts as the publisher, then yes. The authors are merely sub-contractors and their relationship with patrons is quite different. > Likewise, are you claiming that the "by works" model that patreon supports today is illegal? As I commented elsewhere, I might not have understood what the author has been describing and misinterpreted it. The API question, based on your take, then needs to be expanded on. Too many variables here. Sound more to me like this is not an API question at all, but rather lack of functionality/forms/pages/lists on the front-end side? > I'm definitely curious about what you come up with, especially if you get traction with artists - but only about half a dozen of the artists I support through patreon are outside the US anyway, so until you work out US support I'm probably not going to notice. Good luck, though. It will have no geo-restriction so who ever comes will be welcome. Frankly, I am not looking to get millions of users. I will be satisfied if it pays for itself and people's salaries and author get alternative means of communicating with their fans, or the world, in this modern era of censorship and political correctness. My setup if very different from the one bigtech uses, so I hope that will be what will attract people there. I have been working on this for a year with about 5 month break. It will be out next year.

egypturnash 3y ago

"by works is illegal" I've been using Patreon this way since it launched in 2013, and I am pretty sure they have grown to the point where it is impossible for the only reason they get away with it is that they are too small for anyone to say "hey this is illegal, you have x months to stop doing this before we come down on you". "why would I give API access without being able to monetize it" It is worth noting that Patreon was created by a musician with the intent of being a service for artists/musicians/etc, and still occasionally acts like this instead of a purely profit-driven corporate entity whose primary duty is making its shareholders rich. The CEO is still that musician, though I think his musical output has fallen off a lot as "running a system of money pipes" took over his life. Patreon makes a lot of choices that look weird from a purely monetary viewpoint because of this.

krisoft 3y ago
> I think his musical output has fallen off a lot as "running a system of money pipes" took over his life Does not appear to be the case? Jack is pumping out music at an insane rate. If you mean quality wise, that is a lot harder to judge objectively. Subjectively I like his new stuff, and his new band the Scary Pockets is doing well popularity wise.
- egypturnash 3y ago
  Oh he is? I just got as far as looking at his Bandcamp page, which hasn't been updated in years. I'm not into his music, just a happy client of the company he started to try and make more money than Youtube was willing to trickle down to him.

BlueTemplar 3y ago

You are confusing anonymity and pseudonymity. The author never mentioned anonymity, it wouldn't make any sense for a creator trying to develop a fanbase. (Which could be anonymous.) Hosting video, even yourself, has been a solved problem for years now : https://framablog.org/2022/12/13/peertube-v5-the-result-of-5-years-handcrafting/ https://framablog.org/2022/12/13/peertube-v5-the-result-of-5...