Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] A post-IP mechanism for funding creativity

From: Mike Linksvayer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 17:43:01 -0400

On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 10:08:05PM +0930, Emlyn wrote:
> I'm assuming a post-IP world. I know that IP is very much with us, but
> enforcing it in the digital environment, especially for individuals,
> is practically impossible, so it is best to start from the premise
> that individuals can't control the copying of their work.

It may not hurt to start from that premise, but it isn't true, now.
It's impossible to completely control distribution, but it is
possible to limit it to the net equivalent of the informal enconomy.
But mainstream sites being willing to take down unauthroized content
doesn't really help if nobody wants your creation in the first
place.

[aggregate donations, patrons get reputation, artists grants]

Many people have made similar proposals, particularly around five
years ago.  Most were a good deal less coherent than yours. :)  You
should be able to find some if you search for some combination of
gift or sharing economy, distributed patronage, reputation.

For the most part the ideas were never implemented.  The best attempt
I can think of was called Fairtunes.  They actually collected some
(thousands of dollars?) money and distributed to artists, but I
don't think they got to the point of sponsoring new work nor any
sort of automated collection mechanism.

A contemporary example that isn't focused on funding artists but
could be used for that is http://fundable.org.

> I think an idea like the one I've outlined above can move us to a
> situation where there are many more artists, less of a peak on the
> much wider fame mountain (facilitated by the measured reputation
> scores in such a system) and a much more decentralised artistic
> economy where many people can live comfortably making the art they
> want to make.

I doubt there would be many more artists or many (not if you mean
many more anyway) would be able to live comfortably purely from
making their art.  There are already a bazillion artists who lose
money making their stuff.  Regardless of how frictionless patronage
becomes or how locked down distribution becomes, most wannabe
artists aren't going to make any financial profit from their art
making.

However, I think a functioning patronage system would be useful for
funding some artists (and more interestingly scientists and public
goods in general) and serve as a check against those who want to
lock down all digital devices, so I encourage you to implement your
idea.  I'd love to help, but probably can't commit any time.  Some
related ideas that could be complementary:

http://freenetproject.org/?page=fairshare
http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_6/kelsey/
http://www.openknowledge.org/writing/open-source/scb/
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2005/05/assurance_contr.html

-- 
  Mike Linksvayer
  http://gondwanaland.com/ml/
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat