When you say that royalties are a social contract, are you speaking strictly in the context of web3? I ask because in traditional commerce, royalties are a legally binding contractual obligation, rather than a social one. In fact, royalties are a byproduct of the transfer of rights of usage. Can web3 replace traditional commerce if it can't offer the sane protections/obligations between creator and user/buyer.
Even if most artists don't clearly understand why an image is valuable, or how to capitalize on value that they manifest, I still think Web3 has great work to do in educating artists as to HOW web3 is a benefit to them in concrete terms. Especially if web3 is positioning itself as an alternative to traditional commerce.
Yes it's funny you mention that because it's true. The fact is in Web3 it's social because it's hard to legally bind the concept of a "royalty" to an NFT. It's a very inefficient process and at that point you are better off not using NFTs for it.
I do believe Web3 can but again it's how you balance pros/cons. In Crypto world, you have CEXs and DEXs. Same way we will have artist marketplaces most likely designed for this reason (protections/obligations between creator and user/buyer).
"It makes 0 sense to rely on royalties to run your business long-term. It is merely an additional revenue source that is nice to have." - is grossly over generalized and the dumbest thing I've read on the internet today. Gj!
Otherwise, great article and summary of recent developments.
Please enlighten me! If you have no control over a revenue source and your business is jeopardised because a front-end (OpenSea or Blur in this example) on Ethereum decided to stop your royalties - how is that not a bad thing?
When you say that royalties are a social contract, are you speaking strictly in the context of web3? I ask because in traditional commerce, royalties are a legally binding contractual obligation, rather than a social one. In fact, royalties are a byproduct of the transfer of rights of usage. Can web3 replace traditional commerce if it can't offer the sane protections/obligations between creator and user/buyer.
Even if most artists don't clearly understand why an image is valuable, or how to capitalize on value that they manifest, I still think Web3 has great work to do in educating artists as to HOW web3 is a benefit to them in concrete terms. Especially if web3 is positioning itself as an alternative to traditional commerce.
Yes it's funny you mention that because it's true. The fact is in Web3 it's social because it's hard to legally bind the concept of a "royalty" to an NFT. It's a very inefficient process and at that point you are better off not using NFTs for it.
I do believe Web3 can but again it's how you balance pros/cons. In Crypto world, you have CEXs and DEXs. Same way we will have artist marketplaces most likely designed for this reason (protections/obligations between creator and user/buyer).
Most of what I said in my article in Jan 2021 (https://www.loop-news.com/p/beginners-guide-crypto-art-and-nfts) explains why an image is valuable but working on education for that exact reason you mention.
"It makes 0 sense to rely on royalties to run your business long-term. It is merely an additional revenue source that is nice to have." - is grossly over generalized and the dumbest thing I've read on the internet today. Gj!
Otherwise, great article and summary of recent developments.
Please enlighten me! If you have no control over a revenue source and your business is jeopardised because a front-end (OpenSea or Blur in this example) on Ethereum decided to stop your royalties - how is that not a bad thing?
Genuinely asking.
We’ll also see a shift to projects making money as affiliates using platforms like https://sharemint.xyz.
I think we’ll see the same for marketplaces where they generate revenue from mint drops.