I haven’t added my comments here yet, as most have probably read my thoughts in various discord channels and on voice chats. But…
This is a very COMPLEX and LEGAL conversation. And as we do proceed forward with whatever conversations and actions, what I hope for is 1. All music artists and performers(In DCL and outside) to get their dues, and to be protected, 2. The land owners, users who will attend, and the platform of DCL itself to be protected, and 3. We do this in the best way possible to suit our goals and mindsets we have with decentralization, and putting the power within all of our hands, and not a centralized entity.
But that might mean in some way, even if we go with a 3rd party who is in web3, a blanket license will be needed to cover all in one piece of legal, which is in a sense centralized. But we will always vote and decide on this together. Even if it’s something we renew year after year.
As much as we’d love to only use web3 music, and independent artists and music NFTs, not all will, and those will be parties we will participate in. We’re doing it right now.
So even if it doesn’t directly affect us as land owners, we should as a DAO and community find the best way to move forward with. If we don’t now, the labels and big licensing companies will come here and do it themselves.
Please keep an eye out for more, as the foundation and DAO committee is aware of this topic, and we will continue to work closely with each other going forward!
I find the part about not doxing anyone interesting. It brings up another question that may seem redundant, but I’m going to ask it for clarity’s sake anyway:
Have you in any way assisted SOCAN or any other group with information about other clubs? Examples would include (but not be limited to) club owner names, club names, or LAND parcel coordinates.
BTW i think we may have found a work around that may be useful to other event projects. If you host videos on vimeo and then pipe into land via m3u8, then should be covered under vimeo licensing. From my understanding the “live” component is the problem.
The hosted video method actually registers each individual hit on the video. One user = one instance. This allows Vimeo to do the heavy lifting.
The intention of this poll was to solution this problem and bring it to everyone’s attention so they can protect themselves and the artists.
First off, I would like to thank you for answering my questions earlier in this thread. I think we’re golden on that front.
As for Vimeo, I have only one point to raise. I wouldn’t even call this an objection, but I do want to raise awareness of what happened to StoryFire. The short version is that StoryFire essentially used a corporate Vimeo account for their back end, and from what I’ve heard mentioned in passing on some podcasts, StoryFire got a massive bill from Vimeo one day and had to close their doors. Looking at their plans, I see room for some surprise bills. That caveat aside, it sounds like a good work-around.
Yea but then what bro. We gonna pop off one by one each nation, country and independent republic that requires a license. Then follow that by each record label and millions of artists cause some scrub cant remix a song or not take profit off of it and just host a party.
Looks like Vegas City just announced something with a third party called Lick’d which might help land owners with music licensing. This feels like the right type of solution.
Maybe worth hitting them up to see if this is scalable?
