Hey #Fediverse #Musicians - I'm once again trying to figure out premium pricing for #Bandwagon
-
replied to Ben Pate 🤘🏻 last edited by
@benpate OK! So, I registered on the platform and uploaded some music and I like it! I would have some ideas on minor tweaks, but I love how this is working and it being federated is fantastic!
I voted for paying for "Need Extra Features"
Personally, I would love for people not to feel like they have yet another barrier to putting out what they have and I think with Bandcamp offering a free model (with "pay for extra" functionality), it's something that might convince folks to be here...
-
replied to keef last edited by
@keefmarshall @benpate @sknob The server costs question is also related to how the decentralized Bandwagon will actually work. If everyone piles up in the first instance à la mastodon.social, then yes, that will be expensive. If it's easy to set up specialized instances and federate content / searches, then the costs are more spread and affordable for different types of hosts. I wonder whether it is too early to imagine how that federated future will look like.
-
replied to Ben Pate 🤘🏻 last edited by
@benpate the ‘cc is free’ model seems very fitting for the fediverse, and i’m not sure why people think it would complicate things.
as keef pointed out, cc is a license; it does not ‘undo’ copyright. it’s already an ‘honor system’ of sorts where anyone uploading now needs to be honest about either being the rights-holder or that the piece in question is permissively licensed such that they can upload it. ‘all rights reserved’ doesn’t fundamentally change this.
-
replied to bri last edited by
Yes. Thanks for the clarification. I need to find better language to differentiate the regular “all rights reserved” license vs the various CC licenses.
Perhaps that’s it.. since they’re all copyrighted, it’s the LICENSE that matters.
For now, please hand wave over that detail in my character-limited poll questions, and know that we’ll do the right thing when we figure out the actual policy. 🥸
-
replied to Ben Pate 🤘🏻 last edited by
@benpate oh yeah, i didn’t mean to get too pedantic and i hope it didn’t come off that way, i just was a bit confused by responses that seemed to think that would be particularly burdensome.
honestly i think the cc folks could try to communicate things better. i often see takes around cc (and especially cc0) that have me rather concerned folks are making decisions about their hard-earned work that they don’t fully grasp…
-
replied to bri last edited by
Not pedantic at all. And you're not the only person to make that distinction
-
replied to mirlo.space last edited by
I agree completely. No heroes.
This is the point that the whole Fediverse needs to truly embrace. The lack of a proper business model is a major piece that prevents us from being truly competing with the corporate silos.
There MUST be a way for people to have real careers on the Fediverse, and not just hobbies or side-hustles.
And, there's plenty of money in SaaS model. We just need to make it work here, too.
-
replied to icaria36 🎶 last edited by
I promise it'll be easy to set up and participate in federated searches. I've just stumbled into how Framasoft is doing this with PeerTube, and this will be pretty similar.
Still, this stuff is usually cheaper at larger scales, compared to very small ones. So a server with a few thousand artists will likely be cheaper-per-artist than one with a few dozen.
I *do* want to encourage artist communities to set up their own instances. We're just about ready to go..
-
replied to icaria36 🎶 last edited by
Excellent point about bandwidth vs storage
I’d originally thought about putting “music streaming" in the premium category, so “downloads" might be free, but transcoding and streaming music real-time might cost something. It was nice because streaming requires extra work.
But that pricing punishes the smallest artists the most, b/c they're the ones who really need the streaming exposure. So I've ditched this for now.
Gosh, social justice is hard.
-
replied to sknob ⏚ last edited by
Not glib at all.. that's a realistic take on how the game is set up. And if we were playing by the rules, it would be near impossible to launch something like this.
Fortunately, we're not playing by the rules.
There's a few key differences that make this different, with the existing Fediverse network itself being a key strategic advantage.
I could talk shop all day long, but here's the bottom line:
-
replied to Ben Pate 🤘🏻 last edited by
The #Fediverse is dry tinder, primed for a forest fire of change.
#Bandwagon (among others) is the kindling,
and you all are the matches.
Change happens slowly, then all at once. And when the corporate silos no longer have a stranglehold over art and culture, people will flock to new networks (like this one) and the problem of ”covering hosting costs” will be a distant memory.
-
replied to Ben Pate 🤘🏻 last edited by
@benpate @sknob @keefmarshall this has me tingling!
-
-
replied to Monarkie last edited by
A) Thanks for checking out Bandwagon. It really means a lot!
b) Posting publicly works just fine for me, unless there's a reason you need privacy. I really like the idea of developing out in the open; it brings people together, which is even more powerful than whatever code I smash into the computer on a random Thursday.
I will do my best to remove as many barriers as I can. It's a lot to juggle, but worth the time.
-
replied to Ben Pate 🤘🏻 last edited by@benpate Hey Ben, I have many ideas on how you can monetize your service, and I think it’s worth exploring opportunities beyond subscriptions.
Basically, I suggest:
1. Hosting
2. Customizations (e.g., themes)
3. Plug-ins
4. Patronage systems
I’d be happy to discuss in more details. -
replied to Chris Trottier last edited by
@atomicpoet yes. I would love that. maybe we set up a time next week?
-
replied to Ben Pate 🤘🏻 last edited by@benpate Sure, apart from Monday, my calendar is open.
-
replied to Chris Trottier last edited by
Well, that sounds like Tuesday. I’ll coordinate with you over DM