pull down to refresh

Lately, I've been looking into v4v from the perspective of the "business of music." I can't say that I'm an expert on the topic, but as I've engaged in discussions with @rheedi0, of Wavlake, and @joemartinmusic, a v4v advocate, and an artist who uses the Wavlake platform to share his music, I've started to gain a wider perspective.
Even though I haven't researched the topic extensively (I currently have a couple of tabs open in my browser with more v4v articles to read) I think there is value in getting my thoughts out fresh to see what comes of it. The community aspect of SN is what I find most valuable.
First off, I'll direct you to a thread from a couple of days ago where I was in a discussion with @rheedi0. We were discussing how, and if, v4v could provide an adequate solution to the complexities of the music royalty system that's in place right now. I also engaged Joe Martin on nostr and spoke about the same topics:
Does v4v meet the music royalty landscape where and as it exists now, or is it attempting to start fresh from the ground up with a new type of music consumer? I suppose this could apply to any other field in which v4v is also being used. One of my main gripes with the traditional music royalty landscape is that it is too fragmented. They're dicing things up to such a degree, and spreading it out to so many players that weren't even directly related to the creation of the music in the first place. Furthermore, laws and processes are being put into practice which further obfuscate the situation. Unfortunately, that's where we are.
Could v4v handle this fragmentation if it had to from the outset? Let's say a major label decides to transfer all of it's processes to the v4v model, what would that look like? What is becoming obvious to me is that this would require a complete overhaul of their current processes in order to have it make sense under v4v. It's not necessarily that v4v can't handle this fragmentation (but, can it?), maybe it just means that this level of fragmentation is one of the actual problems that need to be solved. This is just a thought, I'm not actually sure about this.
Writing about the subject extends my view and questions surrounding v4v even further, and I know this'll require further research on my part. I had a thought just yesterday where I envisioned the majority of humanity switching over to v4v, especially for media consumption. Would it work?
I don't know what the current makeup of those who transact through v4v is, whether they mostly transact in Bitcoin and Lightning, whether they're half transacting in Bitcoin and fiat, or maybe they're just experimenting with Lightning and v4v, but mainly transact in fiat. Choose one or imagine a scenario somewhere in the middle. My thought is that the majority are still transacting in fiat to a lesser or greater degree. This immediately changes your relationship dynamic with a currency - being fully integrated vs. being somewhat integrated vs. just experimenting.
Getting on here and earning sats for what I create, then stacking or using my earnings as I wish, or even converting some of my extra fiat to Bitcoin so that I can transact and build --- This is very different from earning, transacting, spending, saving, all under the same currency. It's basically what I do now under the fiat paradigm, and that paradigm still has a hold on some of my thought processes, which is why I ask these questions.
In my case, my interactions transacting with Lightning and v4v are all with sats I've earned through the various platforms. This doesn't diminish my financial standing in fiat in any way (other than the time I invest in writing and researching.) Though, if my financial standing depended fully or mostly on my Bitcoin, and I was living my life as I do now, but transacting in Bitcoin, would I feel as free to to zap sats every time I get on Stacker, or Fountain, or Wavlake, or Primal, etc? Would you? Or even better, maybe some of you already do and I welcome the feedback.
I don't know, maybe my mind is f---ed from the fiat mindset and I can't see further than the damn advertising model they've been force feeding us for decades. I personally have had enough of it, which is why I'm here giving this a chance and learning more every day.
The main point of Value4value is to provide whatever you have to offer publicly and without expecting anything in return. Just make sure you provide your audience a way to send you value back!
In the music industry, you have now wavlake that is doing a great job rewarding directly the artists. But imagine a live gig, where there's no entry ticket and everyone could be giving back at any point some sats to a specific address the artist provide.
Now in a V4V economy, all the surrounding ecosystem should work in the same way, like the venue should be providing the space without expecting anything back, same for the sound-engineers and any other people involved. The organization could use payment-splits or any other logic to make sure everyone involved get some value back... transparently and anonymously!
reply
That's a helpful longview on things. Again, quite interesting to envision it working that way, but beautiful at the same time.
reply
Yes it can. Just give it a go. Introduce some internet version 4.0 where value version is the version that gets consumed. SN may lead us as an example.
reply
I accept your enthusiasm and I'm going with it to see where it leads.
reply
@dergigi Now this is pure gold (sats?)!
This is the view I was trying to see. Granted, it sort of cannibalizes my music publishing work in it's current iteration, but I'm all for it if the artists can start to eat! I can still provide value in many other ways. Thank you for your eloquence on the subject.
reply