| |
|
Wednesday, March 20, 2002
|
|
Subject: Re: Content Stock Market Business Model
To: Steve Cooley
on 3/20/02 5:52 PM, steve cooley at dj_catnip@yahoo.com wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're talking about a
> new file format, aren't you? a new encryption
> methodology? you want to tag files... how are you
> going to get distribution when the hardware market's
> overwhelmingly adopted MP3?
That's not my goal. Implementation-wise, I'd like to leverage existing
multimedia container systems (Real, Windows Media, QuickTime). You are
right to point out the portable music issue. It would have to play along in
order for the entire system to work.
I didn't say if would be easy :-)
7:00:44 PM 
|
|
Subject: FW: Yosemite 2002
To: Paulette Donsavage
Yeah!
------ Forwarded Message
> From: "Hein, Randy J" <@boeing.com>
> Subject: Yosemite 2002
>
> Sorry to leave everyone hanging. Yes, we have sites... Lots of them (~50).
> I will get a list/map out within a week. If you have not sent me your site
> information, please do so now & I will get it on the list/map. Sigh ups
> will be soon, so get the word out.
>
> Randy Hein
------ End of Forwarded Message
6:30:40 PM
|
|
Subject: FW: Removing Infinity
To: Tony Gentile
------ Forwarded Message
> From: TGentile@aol.com
> Subject: Re: Removing Infinity
>
> this is consistent with "my" IP registry idea
>
> - content creator has a GUID
> - content publisher (if any) has a GUID
> - album has a GUID
> - each song has a GUID
> - buyers have a GUID
>
> from this, you know who's buying/playing what in (near) real-time. you can
> also facilitate IP transfers (trades, inheritance, etc).
>
> you can do this in any space; you're basically creating the marketplace by
> building the database. you can then stay out of the fray by licensing the
> database to front ends like morpheus or mp3.com.
>
> t --
------ End of Forwarded Message
I think we are talking about the same things (GUID <-> signed files). So,
we can uniquely identify and track each copy of a song.
The question is, how can you convince the audience that this is a good
thing? Scarcity and/or exclusivity were my first choices, because it does
benefit the early adopters and creates the demand for the artists work.
6:00:54 PM
|
|
Subject: What can replace scarcity in supply and demand?
To: Tony Gentile, Steve Cooley
on 3/20/02 3:20 PM, TGentile@aol.com at TGentile@aol.com wrote:
> well, while we agree on some points, i definitely disagree on the notion of
> "artist signed" music in order to create artifical scarcity.
>
> not everything needs to be a dynamically priced good on the initial
> acquisition (used/after-market is different). paying more for a song because
> it's popular doesn't make sense to me. it's JBOTS (Just Bits On The Server) to
> me.
>
> if anything, i'd make a bigger deal about the TIME/DATE of acquisition...
> rather than a "signed" copy to brag about, i'd rather show the 16 yr olds that
> i was listening to Tool two years before they got radio play. i'd love to know
> how many groups i "discovered" before they hit it big, and i'd love for that
> to create opportunities for me to hear about new music first (MTV slogan,
> which is ironic since they generally trail the market by 1-6 mths).
>
> i also wouldn't mind getting a little piece of the action if people i shared a
> song with ended up buying it -- encourage the already existent viral aspect of
> music.
Interesting. We are seeking the same goals: an advantage for finding
artists first, and some benefit for promoting an artist.
In order to move forward, there must be some notion of exclusivity of the
content which is the basis for supply and demand. There will always be
scarcity (books, movie tickets, concert tickets). The problem with DRM
today is that scarcity is implemented to an extreme.
I am open to other implementation ideas for removing infinity, and to better
understanding why (artist signed) does not appeal to you as an audience
member? Perhaps we are talking about the same thing (GUID <-> Signed file)
in that you probably cannot have one without the other...?
What I'm striving for is a model that promotes membership instead of
enforcing exclusivity. What kind of agreement can the artist and the
audience enter that promotes sharing of content while rewarding the artist
for creating it and the audience for appreciating it sooner rather than
later?
Anyone
else want to chime in?
5:58:55 PM
|
|
Subject: Content Stock Market Business Model
To: Steve Cooley
on 3/20/02 12:43 PM, steve cooley at dj_catnip@yahoo.com wrote:
> It's screwed, man.. what's your
> business model for this technology?
I appreciate your direct response!
My model: build the store that a musician can just move into. It would be
an ASP where musicians can register their songs, and then we do all the rest
(numbering each download, signing copies, and keeping a registry of the
audience). We take a percentage of each initial transaction.
Think IPO for content. What would a banking firm do for the initial public
offering of a collection of content like the next U2 or Moby album?
We facilitate a market for certificates for content that represent an
individual license to consume that piece of content. Those certificates can
be validated and transferred.
If you've heard of anyone doing this, I'd love to read more about it!
5:16:31 PM
|
|
Subject: Removing Infinity
To: Tony Gentile, Steve Cooley
on 3/20/02 12:46 PM, TGentile@aol.com at TGentile@aol.com wrote:
> Well, it's not a stock market; there's an infinite supply of digital
> reproductions of a given song, unlike shares of stock.
Yes, agreed. Scarcity is a key to market value. I would like to find a way
to remove that infinite supply problem, and I think it has to be based on a
relationship between the artist and the audience. The *true* fans will only
possess *signed* copies, each one registered with a registry service of the
artists choice.
So, you come to my artist site and request a download of a free song. Even
though it's free, my site will automatically embed your info, number it, and
sign the copy of the song you receive. To verify delivery, the customer
should play the song within a short time (whatever that entails), which
causes a registry check before play begins.
The fans can then decide if they want to share it. Yeah, its the honor
system. You can look at a song, and know who originally bought it (or
bought it last, that is, who legally owns that signed copy of the song).
Fans can even boast about their collections, publish them on the web, etc.
Before you can download a song from fan site and play it, the system checks
to see if it's available for loan (which lapses after a while). A fan can
even purchase more "loan points" to share a song with more than one friend
at a time, and can control who it can be shared with.
I can see this touches on Ofoto, My Family, the content-buddy system we've
talked about. Perhaps this same concept could be applied to the photographs
that people download?
> You were late to the last gathering w/ Steve & Duane, so you missed my ramble
> about GUIDS & Music; basically, creating an IP Registry for music. I think
> that's the foundation for this, many other things music, and many other things
> IP.
The GUIDS is part of it, you are right. The other part is the signature,
which ensures people who examine a song that the information about that song
is valid (the entire ownership history for instance). Each media file needs
to embed the GUID, the transaction history, registry info, and the media
itself.
The benefits to a system like this is that fans become supporters and
protectors. Social policy will move to support your favorite artists, not
just steal from them. It also gives something of value to the fan. Much
like, LPs, 8-tracks, tapes, and CDs, having an electronic account of
licensed content that can be bought and sold on an open e-market, gives the
value of investing early in artists for potential profit later on.
This is the kind of wacky thinking that DRM must consider... What artists
are going to step forward to experiment with this? What signed copy of a
Led Zeppelin digital album will our kids be trading?
3:03:32 PM
|
|
Subject: FW: OAC members: Get 40% off all tele and randonee gear
To: Tony Gentile
Lana just revealed a lesson on the power of exclusivity in brand identity to
me. Combined with her personal touch and her genuine concern for
spamming... Kudos to the OAC!
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: Lana Olson
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 10:25:15 -0800
> To: members@sfoac.com
> Subject: OAC members: Get 40% off all tele and randonee gear
>
> Hey OACers,
>
> Sorry for the second email in one week, but Richard just informed me that
> Lombardi's is getting out of telemark and randonee gear. So, they thought it
> would be a nice gesture to offer OAC members 40% off all tele and randonee
> boots, bindings, skis, and skins. Get 'em while they're hot!
>
> Bring your membership card and get your gear while the gettin's good!
> http://lombardisports.com
>
> Hope to see you all soon!
>
> Lana and Richard
>
> P.S. Don't forget to keep checking the OAC website: we have added tons of
> trips to the spring and summer lineup... rafting, backpacking, kayaking, more.
> And if you don't see your sport listed yet, don't worry, it will be soon! We
> are still working on dates for rock climbing, day hiking, river kayaking,
> surfing, windsurfing, hang gliding, and so much more!
>
> http://www.OutdoorAdventureClub.com
------ End of Forwarded Message
11:16:16 AM
|
|
Subject: Creative Stock Market = A Global Market for
To: Tony Gentile, Steve Cooley
Lots of folks have told me that they don't want to buy whole albums anymore,
but would buy individual tracks. I think that this will only be mutually
beneficial to both the artist and the audience if it's priced like so:
- song collection A-F $5
- song single A $2*
- song single B $3*
- song single C $1*
- song single D $1*
- song single E $1*
- song single F $1*
* = based on popularity
So, all songs start out at $1, and buying a collection is is the best value
if you want all the songs in a particular range. For the first collection
A-F, the price is $5, which is better than buying all 6 individually. Some
people will, however, choose to only purchase 1 song. When songs get
purchased individually, the price starts to go up. Also, as song collection
sales rise, the price also starts to increase.
The premium is on being one of the first to find an artist. You get "in"
cheaper.
Now, if the artist themselves could "sign" the collections and singles,
recording the purchase with a digital signature, those copies themselves
become valuable. Purchases could be tracked.
How to do this with open standards?
It's a stock market model for content.
Every transaction MUST be recorded. It's the only way we can put enough
"trust" into the system to make it viable.
What's more, artists can grant stock, options, and warrants so that they can
find artist investors.
eBay meets the Creative Stock Market
Steve, can you start to think about the algorithms needed to automate this
kind of behavior? What are the variables? What is the schema?
Tony, how do we build it? Who do we tap for marketing?
10:49:09 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2002 deeje.
Last update: 7/17/02; 9:18:32 AM.
|
|
|