Nowadays the market for art is increasing its power thanks to social networks and platforms that allow anyone to express and publish their artistic creations on the web. Omitting the fact that we cannot always define those creations as ART, the democracy of self expression is growing up.But on the other hand – with this system, on the web – anyone can save or copy content, cheating the real author.
Source: Coin Telegraph
It took a crisis to spark off the next revolution in technology. In 2009, a year after Lehman Brothers’ disastrous crash and its subsequent domino effect on the rest of the financial sector, the Bitcoin was launched.
The concept of cryptocurrency, cashless and operating in a peer-to-peer network, had been around for some ten years but until the dawn of the New Great Depression no one had felt the need to explore it in depth. Its stability—the conversion rate has been hovering around $382 per Bitcoin for years now—is seen as a big plus in a world rife with speculation and wildly fluctuating share prices. During the first couple of years over one billion dollars were spent on Bitcoin and the technology supporting it.
Its anonymity fits the needs of criminals buying and selling illegal goods on Darknet sites such as Silk Road, but many progressive organizations now accept the alternative currency as payment. Bitcoin has also penetrated the art world and is rapidly becoming a platform for artistic creativity in its own right.
Only very recently has the digital medium caught up with more traditional approaches in its ability to be valued seriously by collectors. Up until now, a digital piece of artwork could easily be downloaded copied and shared inconsiderately, making ownership a bit of a sham. Creators of original digital artwork (myself included) have more often than not resorted to creating a physical signed version of the original file so as to achieve a more genuine salable item.In truth, a digital piece of art can still be copied and shared, however, emerging technology has changed all this radically.
A collector can now buy or inherit legal ownership of the original digital artwork and then choose to resell it as it goes up in value.
This is where the emergence of Blockchain technology, offered by businesses such as Ascribe, provide a truly innovative solution in securing the provence of a digital file.
Ascribe is a significant new online service that utilizes this new technology empowering “creators to truly own, secure and track the history of a digital work”. Being a digital artist, what I find so interesting with this service is that it enables the creator to register artwork using a unique cryptographic ID stored on the blockchain. Ownership of the digital artwork can be passed on through email directly to the buyer or alternatively the rights of transfer can be consigned to a gallery.
A long-standing problem with digital art is that it can be easily copied, even stolen, leaving artists with little control over their work. But now, with help from the blockchain technology underlying the Bitcoin digital currency, graphic artists and illustrators are finding a new marketplace that protects their pieces’ originality and authenticity.
“It’s a very interesting time to be not only a digital artist, but also a young collector,” said QuHarrison Terry, co-founder and chief executive officer of Victory is Very Illuminating Inc., also known as 23VIVI, a Madison start-up that is among the pioneers in creating a marketplace for the art.
The company has a website that is only 8 weeks old. But Terry and co-founder Ryan Cowdrey have experience and influence in the digital art world.
Source: JS Online
When it comes to bitcoin’s use as money, word-of-mouth has been its biggest asset.
The journey from Internet obscurity to interest from financial incumbents has been a long one, but it started with passionate users, willing to discuss its benefits with friends, and those friends, intrigued by the idea, began to explore – and spend – the currency themselves.
Bitcoin, because of its peer-to-peer design, thrives on connection.
As this conversation goes viral, talk of digital currencies is spreading across the globe, and one community that has been drawn to bitcoin (and the blockchain) is artists. To date, this includes big-name festival staple Imogen Heap and rappers-turned-venture capitalists Nas and 50 Cent, among others.
You need something nuanced yet epic, and with the quality of a symphonic Rachel Portman.
Also, it needs to be licensed commercially. Oh, and did you mention you’re on a super tight budget? Familiar with this quandary, filmmaker Ira Belsky co-founded Art-List, a new subscription-based music licensing platform for independent filmmakers, offering you all the music you want for a yearly flat fee.
Catering to the world of independent filmmakers constantly in need of music that’s neither too MIDI nor too expensive, the subscription idea behind the Art-List sounds pretty enticing. Instead of a licensing fee per song, there is a yearly fee of $199 that gives get unlimited access to everything in the Art-List catalogue, which as of right now has around 1000 songs.
Considering you can often pay $100 to license a single high quality song, this could be a great resource. And having a subscription based model with no restrictions on how (and how often) you can use the tracks is a winning proposition for video professionals who are regularly producing content that needs music.
Digital artwork, from digital music to fine art, has been a growing area for a while now.
If a work is infinitely reproducible at no cost, however, how can a collector establish that they have an original or one of an edition? Monegraph takes advantage of the bitcoin database, the block chain, to log each transfer of a work (just as the database does for bitcoin), so that it really is set in stone who owns a digital piece at each moment.“It’s not about stopping piracy.
It’s about facilitating legitimate commerce,” Kevin McCoy, co-founder and CEO of Monegraph, told the Observer in an interview before the night’s presentations. He pointed to iTunes as an example of a marketplace for digital music.
He said people might have their complaints about how Apple did it, but it was a way for people to know they were purchasing authorized work. There hadn’t been a good way to do that before.
Once there was, people did it.