Let that one sink in… 
For content which is associated with an identity, they will still be subject to copyright laws though. For anonymous uploads and downloads, I think the legal process will quickly become unworkable.
3 Likes
Well, yeah. If somebody uploads their own works to the Safe Network under their public identity, then they may claim copyright as usual. But isn’t that the side of copyright that has never been problematic? 
Maybe I should’ve written:
The world after the Safe Network is a world after enforceable copyrights, for better or worse.
But that sounds less cool 
1 Like
Although it wouldn’t stop copying, couldn’t something like Steganography be used to track who allowed the copy? My access controls require registered identities of the two parties. These identities could be used for embedding the identity in the steganography.
A work’s author can use the identity’s properties to allow or refuse the retrieval.
Something like that.
You can try to fingerprint stuff… But my friend conversion to a lossy format and then back again has something to say about that.
Sure you lose a bit of quality in the process but who cares? File’s untraceable after that. Alternatively get a few copies from a few users, figure out what is different between them and again you have an untraceable file. No loss of quality, but your tracking is useless again.
I don’t know, man. You could do something like that in theory, but how many users would want to give out their real-life identity to buy a book or something? I sure wouldn’t. And, without actual humans to prosecute, all that effort is useless.
Also, let’s say you get a movie in 4K quality. You just transcode it to 1080p, it’s still superb, and there goes the fingerprint. Not to mention, many types of content (books, for example) are simply impossible to fingerprint because there’s nowhere to hide the thing.
Cost. You’d have to create a new slightly altered copy of the document every time you made a sale, and that would add up. You could of course make the buyer pay for that, so who knows, maybe it can work.
Yea, that boat sailed long ago. BT showed it doesn’t solve any problems. And as others said it can be defeated. Also who wants to expose their private information to buy a novel. SAFE is about taking back ones privacy rather than giving it out to every “ebook” seller.
On SAFE it will be “Produce great stuff in good/best quality format and its demonstrated that people will pay willingly” Not everyone obviously. Also when PtP (pay-the-provider) is implemented (hopefully) the artists can make (additional) money because these works will be downloaded a lot since who wants to download pirated copies when they can get the original just as easy and be sure its not filled with malware/adverts. In any case SAFE will encourage artists to provide their best formats and they will earn (direct or ptp) according to their quality rather than some media company pushing the works the media company makes the most money off.
3 Likes
Yes! Really hoping for PtP too. JAMS success kind of hinges on it. It can be done in other ways but not as impressive or far reaching.
1 Like
And think of the massive boost to quality content that it will encourage early on in the growth of SAFE.
The pirates and copycats can only play catch up since the original and best quality is already freely available to whomever wants to see/listen. The copies can only be inferior or exactly the same thus deduped and receive nothing. If any copies are better then they will be new&different and the artist needs to improve their game I guess. At least those who want the original can know its original.
1 Like
Instead of payments for easily replicable content: PtP, tips, sponsorships. (Did I miss something?)
Also, streams to paid live events, maybe?
Much of royalties go to middlemen and not the artist today, so taking that one out doesn’t seem like a huge problem. Much quality content on YouTube is already tip-based (Patreon, etc) and/or supported by affiliating with other content providers (Brilliant, etc) so it seems to be a viable model.
2 Likes
Its still possible for artists to have subscriptions where the subscribers get content on a regular basis (eg behind the scenes), stories, etc and the content is “private” till someone shares the datamap,
Also direct payment using a similar method where the buyer is sent the datamap. Again it can still be shared but there is a portion of the population who will still buy the content even if its freely available.
2 Likes
12 posts were merged into an existing topic: Recent questions about SAFE’s societal implications
True but isn’t the point to replace proprietary software with open source? Thus eliminating that vunerability. What need do you have of a lawyer if you aren’t trying to sue someone for using your software?
