You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Exploring The Monetization of Music on Blockchains
So the musician doesn't actually have full ownership of their work, what they have is a large stake?
So the musician doesn't actually have full ownership of their work, what they have is a large stake?
They would start with 100% stake and sell to the market at whatever rate they choose. This would be no different than an artist giving up ownership of their painting when they sell it. Except we're dividing the ownership into many shares.
But!!! The crazy thing is... that the artist (or label) can still retain all rights to the song and do whatever they want with it because the token holders are financial investors only. It's similar to an investor owning shares of Apple's stock, it doesn't mean they get to use Apple's logo or make decisions about the company, and it doesn't give them rights to anything that Apple produces.
It's an interesting concept. I think that so long as the musician retains full ownership (the label can hold stakes like the listeners), the only other issue would be ensuring there's a continuous revenue stream through plays. If tokens were sold for each play, like a jukebox, I think it would work better.
Yeah, this is just the underlying monetization system... any type of conventional revenue stream can still be pursued. The only difference is that whoever wants access to the song (either for person or commercial use) has to buy tokens and either hold them or burn them depending on the contract.