pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @TresDMan 11h \ on: The Origins of Value 4 Value as Far as I Can Tell bitcoin
I've always wondered if the value extracted from intellectual property rights can live fruitfully alongside the v4v concept.
In a literal sense, they can coexist, but would that prevent either one from fully flourishing?
Is the intricate web of intellectual property rights and how artists eventually receive their royalties, at odds with the concept of v4v?
Music example -
My (very big) assumption is that Wavlake is only doing deals directly with artists. They take their cut, and the artist's song is now available for streaming and v4v payments on their site.
In most cases, I also assume there aren't labels involved, but I do think there system of split payments could account for their involvement.
What may not be happening is reporting to the PROs (BMI, ASCAP, etc.) which tracks public performance uses for the songs they represent. This would activate artist royalties when reported. The PROs are just one entity amongst various that should be reported to to receive proper remuneration for the use of songs (as it relates to intellectual property rights.)
If Wavlake artists are not affiliated with any of these entities, then it's all good. If they are, and Wavlake is not reporting, then the artists are surely missing out on their royalties.
Just to be clear, I'd like for this to come across as just some thoughts I've had related to v4v, not as a complaint.
If Wavlake begins partnering with labels and reporting to all appropriate entities, will the costs then become prohibitive for them? Or can these two concepts coexist?
Does this also mean that there is a whole swath of artists that now exist outside of this "music industry" system? I know they've always existed, even before v4v was given a name, but just humor me for a moment.
If the concepts are mutually exclusive, is the existence of one better for artists than the other?
You can now take these questions and apply them to all forms of intellectual property.
I tried not to get too into the nitty gritty of music industry specifics, just so I could get my point across as clearly as possible. Hopefully, I achieved this...
I think that if "intellectual property" which I oppose as an idea was abolished v4v would flourish.
reply
reply
Do you think it can still flourish in this sector of the market with intellectual property still in existence?
Yes, but its a very cultural thing and the fiat mindset is probably a bigger factor. The "free" ad model is still dominant and few yet understand the tradeoffs of that model.
Why do you oppose intellectual property as an idea?
Its a logical fallacy. Ideas aren't property. If I write it down on paper that paper is property. Copying is different from stealing. That's the shortest version.
Reading this and thinking through it for a few months changed my mind on the topic many years ago. Against Intellectual Property
On the surface what I'm saying sounds right but functionally I didn't see how a world without IP would function. Today I think IP actually holds humanity back just as most state actions that limit the free exchange of ideas and good do.