Not my problem. If it’s pushed it can be pirated. Figure out a better system than constant rent-a-stream.
Oh for the love of toast! Start thinking creatively and come up with better business models. This is SAFE we’re talking about right? You’re paid by the GET right? So you’ll get paid for just putting out lots of content. So put it out there FOR FREE and attract lots of people to your content and therefore get more GETs and earn more safecoin. Stop trying to create artificial scarcity! Or produce lots of content out there and then get people to hire you for custom commision jobs. Or produce lots of digital work and then learn skills to produce physical works that you charge for. I mean for crying out load think outside the box some.
And I’m still not gaining possession of what I’m paying for. So really I don’t care if you think it’s “fair.” You’re talking a pay to play radio or stream which again applies to the DVD rental example. It’s only worth it to me if the cost of renting times the amount I watch is less than the amount I’d pay to download or buy the box set outright. It’s not the customer’s responsibility to make sure the artist is funded. Nor is it SAFE’s.
Really? You believe all artists ascribe to your theory? No. I’m an artist and I don’t agree with you at all. What about all those artists that DEPEND on being able to download content in order to create new content? Are you going to ban all the karaeke singers and mashtape artists and amv artists from SAFE because you don’t want them downloading content and would prefer them to be locked into streaming content because YOU want “some artist” to stay in control. What about THOSE artists that would find another network. See really we’re talking about a couple different kinds of artists here. We’re talking about Big Media artists, the ones from Hollywood, the ones that defend copyright and the MPAA and what not. And then we have the ones that download content, pirate music and movies and then remix all that into new works of art. The ones that create stuff with blender or download music to make backtracks for videos or kareoke or whatever else. The one’s that spend hours and hours splicing and remixing and editing things and posting them on youtube which people in turn spend hours and hours and hours watching. Youtube wouldn’t even be as big as it is if it weren’t for downloaded content. As much as they try and fight it Youtube thrives on piracy. So really I do contest this idea that “artists” would all leave SAFE if your streaming idea didn’t go through or failed. Not to mention your streaming idea would be an app in the first place and so people would need to opt to use it.
No it means you are establishing a different kind of relationship with the person you are dealing with. You are GIVING them something instead of exchanging something with them via quid pro quo. Just because something is of worth to me doesn’t mean I need to assign a monetary price to it and/or require someone to pay for it.
So don’t use fiat, or at least don’t keep your money there. Stupidity is not an excuse for infinite royalties.
I’m not saying don’t set up your rent-a-stream. I’m saying don’t expect customers to have some moral obligation to use it. Also consider you can do commissions or work for some company doing specific jobs they want done. Just don’t try to make money on some ludicrous idea of creating artificial scarcity. There’s all kinds of ways to make money as an artist and content producer. Just think creatively.
I don’t know. Maybe half a penny wouldn’t mean anything to someone in the first world but what about someone from India or Africa or something? Price is relative. And again I’d prefer to own my data and what I paid for.