What determines the price of a song?
The artist.
What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.
I think this decision could be a mistake. The market should determine the price of a product or service rather than the seller. I do understand why you would want artists to try and determine it but it's likely that if the artists get it wrong then it would encourage piracy or fans simply wont buy it at all.
Can we have a market based option for artists who want to let the market or the fans determine the price?
We should create a ranking/tracking system like Billboards is to music in general. Would have create a ranking algorithm like google search that tracks, downloads, streams, votes, and other engagement metrics to rank the artist. This would create a good competition between the artist and their fans. This all leads up to some king of awards shows like the Grammy/AMAs.
I think having a scripting language would be better than hard coding something like this. It's a mere sort algorithm is what you're talking about and if you have scripting language capabilities then I could write a sort algorithm once and have them work on all the similar DACs.
What determines the price of a song?
The artist.
What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.
Is there any other selling model? For example, Google Music has 'monthly subscription' that you can listen to whatever you want with $9.99/month. In Taiwan, east asia and many other places, people would prefer this model than paying for each song. Considering this mode does not mean to invest any specific artist, I think the fee for monthly subscription should charged as Notes, and then:
1. shared between artists.
2. or used to buy and burn artistcoins of songs that were listened.
It might be too ambitious to roll out all at once, but I do see potential for multiple streams of income. In a subscription based (or free ad based) model, you can pay the artist in proportion to how many listens they received, while using a weighting system to increase the pay/airtime on artists who get voted up while decreasing the pay/airtime for those who get voted down.
The subscription model doesn't make any money for artists. The ad model is the worst model you could go with if the idea is to attract artists.
The market based approaches are interesting but untested. I think for artists familiar with the way of altcoins will prefer the market based approaches. I think the traditional approaches would be great for industry artists who are more familiar with that.
I think flexibility and all kinds of payment approaches should be offered. One of the benefits of this technology is that you can do all kinds of different approaches and it's not one sized fits all. You can do micropayments in a fair way but you can also turn the music itself into a commodity.
I would suggest that we find a way to get a Turing complete scripting language set up so that you can do all sorts of different smart contracts between artist and fans. I would also suggest that the development team put in as many different options for artists as they can at launch and simply make the default options the most simple. This way artists feel like there is unlimited flexibility to try new ideas while also having the simple defaults which are familiar.
What determines the price of a song?
The artist.
What determines the price of an Iphone cover on ebay? The seller!
ebay has no say in how much a product sells for on their platform.
Is there any other selling model? For example, Google Music has 'monthly subscription' that you can listen to whatever you want with $9.99/month. In Taiwan, east asia and many other places, people would prefer this model than paying for each song. Considering this mode does not mean to invest any specific artist, I think the fee for monthly subscription should charged as Notes, and then:
1. shared between artists.
2. or used to buy and burn artistcoins of songs that were listened.
I think we need more flexibility by far. Some artists would rather trust the market and simply release their coin to the fans so the fans can use price discovery mechanisms. Other artists may want to go with more industry familiar models.
I think considering that you're presenting a very unorthodox market based technology why remove all the most innovative features and water it down? I'd like to see market based approaches to price discovery for artists who prefer this. Also for fans who would prefer to use market based approaches it should be there.
Subscription based approaches don't make any sense unless it's subscription to individual artist channels. Why would people come from the regular business models onto this technology only to go with a subscription? Having said that I'm not against the idea if it could be made to work. Maybe do it so that the fans automatically buy a certain amount of artist coin each month in the artists they really believe in.
This would be something like a recurring payment.