Thread by @punk6529

12/ The default approach for all art is that rights rest with the artist.

You do not as a collector get the commercial rights.

That is true for photography, gen art and 1/1s and everything

13/ My specific thesis is not that your rights are worth exactly 1ETH but that you are probably overvaluing the 'commercial rights' vs the NFT.

And this is true if you are in the 0.1, 1, 10 or 100ETH range

14/ I consider this relatively easier in photography because photography is relatively high volume output for most artists (I am flooded w collections) so you can test different models "not with your grails"

Save your grails for traditional approach or sell rights super high

15/ But what I am trying to get across is that the value is in the NFT and in the community, not in the right to make prints or put them on stock photo sites (for most photographers, not for all, but for most).

So people should run experiments.

16/ Why did I am offering 1 ETH not 100ETH? Because I am making an open-ended commitment to buy 5 items in feed regardless if I see anything I like.

I am happy to look at any other items, at any other price, with no commitment on my side.

17/ OK, off to dinner.

Feel free to yell at me in my feed, I expected this, this is why I raised the topic.

Reminder:
1) You open-source 1 of your images to everyone
2) I pay you 1ETH to do it (ppl do it on wikimedia all day long for free, frens)
3) Only if you want

🥳

18/ Last one. Been DMing with @halecar2. He thinks some artists are concerned that collectors will then start negotiating rights on 'expensive NFTs'.

I am more sanguine about this. We collectors all collect from main platforms with standard rights.

And..

19/ ...if the whole field of NFT photography collapses because 6529:

- spends 300ETH on regular model
- spends 5 ETH on open-source model

Well, then the system was going to collapse anyway and so you really need to think of new ideas.

I am more optimistic about this medium.

20/ Real last post before dinner.

Let's walk though this logic.

You are an unknown photographer, you enter this experiment, you open-source an image, I pay you 1 ETH for this

21/ Then, accordingly to my feed, DISASTER strikes and Coca-Cola uses it for their Super Bowl ad and does not pay you (they would pay in practice to be covered but whatever).

In how many days, will you be rich from your next NFT drop and will it be more than 1 day?

22/ 🚨🚨 New Twist To The Experiment 🚨🚨

A lot of people are getting overly stuck on if 1ETH is the right price for their work which is of course not at all the point.

So I will accept also entries where you price your work at whatever you think the right price is

23/ In other words, I still commit to buying 5 pieces at 1 ETH, but also open to proposals for full open-sourcing of your piece at whatever price you think it is fair. I have collected from 0.1 ETH to 100ETH so the whole range is fine.

I don't commit to buying but you can pitch

24/ But how should you value the open-sourcing rights?

Ah, this is the question I want you to think about.

Think about similar pieces. How much have you made from prints, licensing, stock photos across all those pieces.

Average it, multiply x 2 and that is the price

25/ BTW, the formula above is the *worst case scenario* for this. In the highly unlikely case your piece goes viral from open-sourcing, most people will still want to buy directly from you.

But let's ignore that, let's assume you lose all other revenue from that piece

26/ So the formula imho is for pieces of similar quality in your work/catalog:

a) Your NFT price +
b) [Your average commercial rights earned] x 2

27/ I hope with this formula nobody is going to complain that I am not supporting artists by asking them to potentially consider making more money that they usually make.

For most artists, most pieces, part b) above is less than you think and the rest don't need my advice