Author Topic: I do not agree with Bitshares Music/Peertracks current model/Better Suggestions  (Read 8403 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sschechter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 380
    • View Profile
Remember, decentralization often has high costs.  Centralized companies and the blockchain can have symbiotic relationships.  Just because something theoretically could be decentralized, doesn't necessarily mean it should.  Especially for music - BitShares Music and Peertracks are trying to make a profitable company, not a one Currency to Rule Them All.

Anyways, I'm glad to hear that streaming will be offered.  Personally, I would like to see a free ad supported streaming version, and a paid ad free version.  Additionally, the user should have the ability to purchase a lossless high quality version.  And it would really be gravy if an artist can optionally offer resample permission with the purchase of a song, or with an additional fee.  That permission of course would be logged in the blockchain, and users with permission can be publicly verified.  I don't think artist sample clearance has been done before this simple and elegantly, and the ease of use may actually encourage good market behavior (and garner positive press)

Add supported free version: average quality MP3 files
Paid subscription: high quality MP3 or greater
Paid individual songs: highest quality, no loss of recorded information, always available for immediate download
Paid re-usage rights

I also think BitShares music is perfect for the 'blockchain referral program', similar to what MethodX has proposed elsewhere in the forum.  Artists who sign up other artists with PeerTracks get to receive a small cut of their friends fees - but this has to be done in a way that is mutually beneficial for all parties.  Perhaps segregating a cut of the network fees into a bonus pool, in which referers take a cut proportional to the popularity of their referred.  The bonus has to be big enough to incentive people inviting their friends, but not too big in which it creates a profits hierarchy.  No MLM, just good ole fashioned refer a friend.  I think you get the point for now, but if there is interest, we can extrapolate on this idea and brainstorm ways to make it work.

Anyways, we all know this has huge potential.  Lets make this thing work!

BTSX: sschechter
PTS: PvBUyPrDRkJLVXZfvWjdudRtQgv1Fcy5Qe

Offline VoR0220


Here's a question. Is it possible to have a decentralized verification system for artist and songs that also prevents fraud without limiting the playback software/hardware?

Yes. My way would start off with some centralized features but gradually get rid of them once a majority of artists were signed onto the protocol. After that it becomes a matter of telling artists that they are responsible for their own security in what gets uploaded and what doesn't and that the protocol is not responsible if you are hacked and the file is distributed on the platform.

There is very much a way to check for copies of music that is fraudulent. It's called audio fingerprinting and it's not beyond the scope of possibility to make a database and then check for replicas with it. These work 100% of the time when scanning the file from a harddrive in its full format.

The question now becomes what to do about artists that are already established that haven't signed on. Who's to stop someone from putting their files in a database and then claiming it as their own? We can do this by establishing a vote out system granted to the shareholders across the network that would allow artist files to be transferred to another address plus the currency in the fraudulent account. If Bitshares Music/Peertracks owns 50% of the shares, then this is easily achievable at first. Of course this goes against the tenants of decentralization, but the idea is to set a time table to eventually phase out the hold on the network.

In conclusion. Yes. It's very doable. Don't know why I'm the only one that sees it.

https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Pheonike


Here's a question. Is it possible to have a decentralized verification system for artist and songs that also prevents fraud without limiting the playback software/hardware?

Offline VoR0220

I'll make this it's own thread once we have a definite mechanism.

But I think everyone will be glad to know that PeerTracks will be incorporating streaming from the get-go.

It will be a subscription model.

We are in R&D mode right now. Looking into Open Transactions, Hyperledger, flattr and reading up on all that fun royalties stuff haha

The easiest model to implement right now would be the subscription model where the user puts say 10$ a month for unlimited streaming.

The ledger keeps track of every song he listens to in his month.
Take the amount of songs he listened to this month. Say 200.
10$/200 plays = 0.05 BitUSD per play.

The ledger is read and PeerTracks sends 0.05 BitUSD to, and only to, the artists that where played by this user that month.

this is the simplified version. Since artists that have artistcoins will have a % going into the coin buy back mechanism.

This is still just in brainstorming mode. We have to see what is scalable and what is even possible in the world of royalty payments.

Just a heads up that we are looking at streaming being incorporated IN the MVP. So far (unless Open Transactions can change the game) the streaming option would be centralized. All the rest still stays on blockchain, no funds held by peertracks. The subscription streaming plan would be something done by PeerTracks though, meaning it would collect funds, and then pay the proper people. Although the ledger is public so we can't screw the artist over like many other services do.

Don't take this post as gospel btw! This is like.. 24 hours after we decided to incorporate streaming into the MVP haha

Thanks for the response Cob,

Don't understand why you can't decentralize the streaming model. This is meant to be a decentralized platform. Why is there so much centralization going on? Especially when the technology to feasibly do this is there. Still also don't understand why you can't incorporate something (if you must have us pay for streaming services) along the line of credit for transaction fees paid in. That would seem to be another way you could decentralize it.

Something tells me that there are legal constraints at hand. Which if this is the case, would you mind informing us what could happen if this is decentralized?
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline Riverhead

I don't mind $10 a month since you can save playlists offline. This allows me to "stream" at home, road trips, flying, etc. My playlists if bought by track would be thousands and thousands. That pays for a lot of streaming.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk


Offline oco101

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
    • View Profile
I used to pay for LastFM about 3$ a month, and that was ok this as high that I will pay a month. I will never pay 10$ to Spotify that is for sure, heck it cost more than Netflix. I know your 10$/ month  was just an example but I think it is to much.
Please be Netflix don't be Blockbuster

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Sounds good. I worry that if it's ONLY streaming and not direct sales that some people won't pony up the $10. Would be nice to have both available so people could buy a single song if they wanted. But streaming seems to be the fad these days, so if that's what people want and a simple way to start, then it's cool with me.

Offline xeroc

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12922
  • ChainSquad GmbH
    • View Profile
    • ChainSquad GmbH
  • BitShares: xeroc
  • GitHub: xeroc
wow .. thanks for the (draft) update ..

Quote
The ledger is read and PeerTracks sends 0.05 BitUSD to, and only to, the artists that where played by this user that month.
that's centralized and difficult to implement transparently IMHO .. but I think that is ok as long as the streaming platform itself is (or has to be) centralized ..
I should definitely start reading into maidsaife/storj and figure out if these offer a solution for a decentralized streaming with "pay options"

Offline cob

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: cobb
I'll make this it's own thread once we have a definite mechanism.

But I think everyone will be glad to know that PeerTracks will be incorporating streaming from the get-go.

It will be a subscription model.

We are in R&D mode right now. Looking into Open Transactions, Hyperledger, flattr and reading up on all that fun royalties stuff haha

The easiest model to implement right now would be the subscription model where the user puts say 10$ a month for unlimited streaming.

The ledger keeps track of every song he listens to in his month.
Take the amount of songs he listened to this month. Say 200.
10$/200 plays = 0.05 BitUSD per play.

The ledger is read and PeerTracks sends 0.05 BitUSD to, and only to, the artists that where played by this user that month.

this is the simplified version. Since artists that have artistcoins will have a % going into the coin buy back mechanism.

This is still just in brainstorming mode. We have to see what is scalable and what is even possible in the world of royalty payments.

Just a heads up that we are looking at streaming being incorporated IN the MVP. So far (unless Open Transactions can change the game) the streaming option would be centralized. All the rest still stays on blockchain, no funds held by peertracks. The subscription streaming plan would be something done by PeerTracks though, meaning it would collect funds, and then pay the proper people. Although the ledger is public so we can't screw the artist over like many other services do.

Don't take this post as gospel btw! This is like.. 24 hours after we decided to incorporate streaming into the MVP haha
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline VoR0220

People buying music online has begun to fall because ppl dont want to pay and they want to get free stuff. however, peertracks you can profit. this is about a fan supports artists and gain huge profits. have you ever been to a concert or live show? Say MJ is alive, and he blogged those MJ fans should support him buy his peertrack coins, what you think would happen? that his fan would ignore his message or something else?

I've been to and played many concerts. People can be fans and still not purchase the music. Mostly because they can get it for free. What they can't get for free is a concert, a shirt, art, or a chance to hang with their favorite artist. Hence why many artists are learning to embrace those models to sell themselves and fund their living. I would like for the model to take this into account.

There are reasons for why people buy CDs. Mostly it's sound quality related/audiophiles. This has also sparked the intrigue in vinyl amongst young hipsters.

One thing's for sure. Something needs to be implemented in the protocol to ensure top audio quality.

seeing this article here, I'm curious now how old the people who think that we should be selling the music are? Anybody like to share? I'm 21.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/15/tech/web/music-streaming/

i guess mostly ppl around ur age or above at least. Peertracks i think is an investment and business. i doubt teenagers are more likely to know any business, i mean most teenagers.

You'd be surprised. I always viewed my band as a business. I was 16 when I started it. Granted it failed, but such is life. Don't be so quick to throw off what may be the largest customer.
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline kickky

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
People buying music online has begun to fall because ppl dont want to pay and they want to get free stuff. however, peertracks you can profit. this is about a fan supports artists and gain huge profits. have you ever been to a concert or live show? Say MJ is alive, and he blogged those MJ fans should support him buy his peertrack coins, what you think would happen? that his fan would ignore his message or something else?

I've been to and played many concerts. People can be fans and still not purchase the music. Mostly because they can get it for free. What they can't get for free is a concert, a shirt, art, or a chance to hang with their favorite artist. Hence why many artists are learning to embrace those models to sell themselves and fund their living. I would like for the model to take this into account.

There are reasons for why people buy CDs. Mostly it's sound quality related/audiophiles. This has also sparked the intrigue in vinyl amongst young hipsters.

One thing's for sure. Something needs to be implemented in the protocol to ensure top audio quality.

seeing this article here, I'm curious now how old the people who think that we should be selling the music are? Anybody like to share? I'm 21.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/15/tech/web/music-streaming/

i guess mostly ppl around ur age or above at least. Peertracks i think is an investment and business. i doubt teenagers are more likely to know any business, i mean most teenagers.
花爷PTS钱包地址:PmUahfrEvADd7KewwpcZwNBg6LNGgzCyAG
花爷比特币钱包地址:1Ggfyb5HN6Eb7S5j3zax3NpQ4V6ZWStHeh

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile

I've been to and played many concerts. People can be fans and still not purchase the music. Mostly because they can get it for free. What they can't get for free is a concert, a shirt, art, or a chance to hang with their favorite artist. Hence why many artists are learning to embrace those models to sell themselves and fund their living. I would like for the model to take this into account.


I'm sure once the model is up and running, it can be tweaked for video, streaming music, playlists, etc., but sales is definitely a good place to start. Music sales are still worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $15 billion in revenue each year. Plenty of potential to tap into there. If no one bought music, there wouldn't be many bands, since T-shirt sales and the like are only a fraction of the market. Those things are good, but they are no replacement for the revenue from music itself. I buy music because I like it and I want to support good music. I even buy extra CDs and MP3s and give them to people to help promote bands I like. I think struggling bands with good quality music will be thrilled about PeerNotes/BitShares Music and I'll be thrilled to have some stake in the success of my favorite bands.

Age: Over the hill, so I guess I don't count. Then again, most teens and young twenties are broke anyway...if you had money, you'd be buying music! :) 

Offline Riverhead

In a Mumble chat Cob mentioned that the artists will be free to use their coins in a number of creative ways.

Examples:

- A custom artist webpage experience depending on how many coins you own.
- Top 25 coin holders get to meet the band back stage
- Top 100 coin holders get free concert tickets
- top 10 coin holders get early access to song releases
-? ? ?

Since music is sold with bitUSD which is aquirred via Notes (like BTSX/bitUSD) the revenue/investment proposition of an artistcoin is going to be all about perks, scarcity, and music sales.

If One Direction is going to Chicago and they announce the top 100 ODCoin holders get access to a special viewing section or something you can bet there will be a spike in ODCoin price.

As for streaming...I tend to agree and I'm not that young (we'll just say over 40 :) ). I haven't bought one off music in years but I do pay subscription fees to Google Music, Spotify, and occasionally Pandora.

Offline VoR0220

People buying music online has begun to fall because ppl dont want to pay and they want to get free stuff. however, peertracks you can profit. this is about a fan supports artists and gain huge profits. have you ever been to a concert or live show? Say MJ is alive, and he blogged those MJ fans should support him buy his peertrack coins, what you think would happen? that his fan would ignore his message or something else?

I've been to and played many concerts. People can be fans and still not purchase the music. Mostly because they can get it for free. What they can't get for free is a concert, a shirt, art, or a chance to hang with their favorite artist. Hence why many artists are learning to embrace those models to sell themselves and fund their living. I would like for the model to take this into account.

There are reasons for why people buy CDs. Mostly it's sound quality related/audiophiles. This has also sparked the intrigue in vinyl amongst young hipsters.

One thing's for sure. Something needs to be implemented in the protocol to ensure top audio quality.

seeing this article here, I'm curious now how old the people who think that we should be selling the music are? Anybody like to share? I'm 21.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/15/tech/web/music-streaming/
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
There is still an ENORMOUS demand for music sales. It's a perfectly fine place to start. The model will evolve, I'm sure.