#patreon

  • Maliki nous parle Tipeee, milieu de l’édition et avenir de la BD
    http://www.9emeart.fr/post/interview/franco-belge/interview-maliki-nous-parle-tipeee-milieu-de-l-edition-et-avenir-de-la-bd-83

    Pourquoi avoir lancé un compte Tipeee ?
    Le lancement de Tipeee s’est imposé comme une évidence quand j’ai vu qu’au rythme auquel mes revenus (provenant du circuit traditionnel) chutaient, il me faudrait trouver un autre métier d’ici un an ou deux. Je ne dirais pas que faire appel au mécénat participatif était un acte désespéré, puisque ça faisait un moment que je suivais avec intérêt l’évolution de ce type de rémunération pour les auteurs américains sur Patreon, mais c’était en revanche vraiment une question de survie, couplée à l’envie de retrouver plus d’autonomie et de liberté. Je suis partie du constat que le circuit classique ne fonctionnait plus, en tout cas pour moi. Le pourcentage de rémunération des auteurs est ridicule, 8 à 10% du prix du livre en moyenne, 1€ et des poussières par livre. C’est le maillon le moins bien payé de la chaine.

    Les placements de mes livres en magasins étaient hasardeux, et quand il y en avait, l’espérance de vie du livre en rayon était d’une semaine ou deux... La communication, c’est principalement moi qui la gérais, sur les réseaux, sur mon site. J’ai réalisé des bandes annonces en dessin animé, toute seule, à mes frais pour promouvoir mon travail parce qu’il n’y avait « pas de budget » pour ça. J’ai rémunéré une comédienne de doublage pour faire la voix. J’ai vu des quantités monstrueuses de mes livres revenir pour se faire pilonner parce que ça coûtait moins cher de les détruire que de les remettre dans le circuit. J’ai vu des intermédiaires se gaver sur mon dos pour des services qui m’étaient quasi-inutiles ou inexistants. On fait miroiter aux auteurs la « chance » d’être présents en magasin, mais c’est un miroir aux alouettes. En réalité, nous ne sommes qu’un grain de sable plein d’espoir dans l’immense désert de la surproduction organisée. Retrouver un contact direct avec ma communauté, mes lecteurs, en circuit court comme le font les agriculteurs étouffés par la grande distribution, m’a semblé la seule chose rationnelle à faire.

    #Don #Financement_participatif #Flattr #Modèle_économique #Numérique #Patreon #Tipeee #Web


  • Petit bilan Tipeee, et réflexion sur son intérêt pour des auteurs de fiction - Lizzie Crowdagger : le blog
    http://crowdagger.fr/blog/index.php?post/2017/05/28/Petit-bilan-Tipeee%2C-et-r%C3%A9flexion-sur-son-int%C3%A9r%C3%AAt-pour-de

    Au niveau financier, à moins d’avoir déjà une énorme notoriété (auquel cas on n’a probablement pas besoin de ça pour gagner de l’argent), il ne faut pas s’attendre à des miracles, mais par rapport à d’autres systèmes je pense que ça peut avoir l’avantage d’être complémentaire plutôt qu’une alternative : le fait de proposer un texte en contrepartie à ses abonné·e·s Tipeee n’empêche pas de l’auto-éditer ensuite sur des plate-formes, voire éventuellement de le soumettre à un éditeur (point peut-être plus discutable, mais à moins d’avoir beaucoup d’abonné·e·es ça ne me paraît pas une diffusion beaucoup plus publique que de faire lire quelques exemplaires à ses potes, sa famille, des bêta-lecteurs, etc.).

    Au-delà de l’aspect financier, ça peut aussi être quelque chose de positif pour les écrivain·e·s qui, comme moi, ont une assez forte tendance à la procrastination. Cela dit, je pense que ça peut vite devenir étouffant aussi, et se révéler demander autant de travail qu’un boulot à plein temps sans avoir le salaire qui va avec. Donc si l’idée vous intéresse, je recommande de réfléchir à ce à quoi vous engagez et de voir ce que ça implique. Je pense qu’il vaut mieux commencer en promettant peu, quitte à augmenter par la suite si ça marche bien et si vous arrivez à tenir la cadence, que promettre la lune et entraîner des déceptions, ou vous effondrer à cause d’un burn-out parce que cela vous demande un travail énorme pour peu de résultats.

    Bref, ce système n’est pas parfait, encore moins miraculeux, et par ailleurs je pense que la multiplication de ces financements participatifs ne va pas sans poser des questions

    #Don #Financement_participatif #Flattr #Modèle_économique #Numérique #Patreon #Tipeee #Web


  • “Ethical issues in research using datasets of illicit origin” by Daniel R. Thomas, Sergio Pastrana, Alice Hutchings , Richard Clayton and Alastair R. Beresford

    https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3131389 (PDF in https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~drt24/papers/2017-ethical-issues.pdf or on Sci-Hub)

    It is mostly about leaked datasets (such as the #Patreon database) but it talks also about active network measurements (such as the #Carna_scan). Very good reading around the question “crackers breached an Internet server, distribute the database they got, can I use it for honest research?”

    #ethics #cybercriminality #research_in_networking


  • On VidCon, Harassment & Garbage Humans
    https://feministfrequency.com/2017/06/26/on-vidcon-harassment-garbage-humans

    To kick off the Women Online panel at VidCon last Thursday, the moderator posed the question: Why do we still have to talk about the harassment of women? I replied, “Because I think one of my biggest harassers is sitting in the front row.” He showed up with several others; together, his group took up the two front rows at the panel. Their presence was plainly not, as one of […]


    http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/15c8bcc3506d9045ca7f00e1457cad57?s=96&d=identicon&r=G

    • Carl is a man who literally profits from harassing me and other women: he makes over $5,000 a month on #Patreon for creating YouTube videos that mock, insult and discredit myself and other women online, and he’s not alone. He is one of several YouTubers who profit from the cottage industry of online harassment and antifeminism; together, these people have millions of followers who are regularly encouraged by the videos and tweets of these individuals to harass me and other women who make videos daring to assert the basic humanity of women, people of color, trans folks, and members of other marginalized groups.



  • #Pomplamoose 2014 Tour Profits — Medium
    https://medium.com/@jackconte/pomplamoose-2014-tour-profits-67435851ba37

    We lost $11,819 [on the tour].

    But this isn’t a sob story. We knew it would be an expensive endeavor, and we still chose to make the investment. We could have played a duo show instead of hiring six people to tour with us. That would have saved us over $50,000, but it was important at this stage in Pomplamoose’s career to put on a wild and crazy rock show. We wanted to be invited back to every venue, and we wanted our fans to bring their friends next time. The loss was an investment in future tours.
    Crowdsurfing somewhere in the middle of the country.
    Rock and Roll.

    At the end of the day, Pomplamoose is just fine: our #patrons give us $6,326 per video through our #Patreon page. We sell about $5,000 of music per month through #iTunes and #Loudr. After all of our expenses (yes, making music videos professionally is expensive), Nataly and I each draw a #salary of about #$2500 per #month from Pomplamoose. What’s left gets reinvested in the band

    We’re entering a new era in history: the space between “starving artist” and “rich and famous” is beginning to collapse. #YouTube has signed up over a million partners (people who agree to run ads over their videos to make money from their content). The “#creative_class” is no longer emerging: it’s here, now.

    We, the creative class, are finding ways to make a living making #music, drawing webcomics, writing articles, coding games, recording podcasts. Most people don’t know our names or faces. We are not on magazine covers at the grocery store. We are not rich, and we are not famous.

    We are the mom and pop corner store version of “the dream.” If Lady Gaga is McDonald’s, we’re Betty’s Diner. And we’re open 24/7.

    We have not “made it.” We’re making it.

    Jack Conte

    #financement #creation #musique #internet


  • Art (#music) is a #business – and, yes, artists have to make difficult, honest business decisions | Amanda Palmer | Comment is free | theguardian.com
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/13/amanda-palmer-art-business-difficult-honest-decisions

    #Jack_Conte, one-half of the indie duo #Pomplamoose, is confronting this paradox the hard way in the wake of his recent post on Medium in which he lays bare the nuts, bolts, nets and grosses of his group’s 24-show American tour. Pomplamoose decided to pull out most of the stops and hire a full crew (sound, lights, tour manager, merch person), spare few expenses (buying new lights and road cases for their gear), and they freely admitted to considering the undertaking an investment in their future as a touring band. They lost about $12,000 after grossing a total of $136,000. I looked at that and barely blinked.

    Metaphorically, the band didn’t even fly first class, but that didn’t stop armchair critics from complaining that Pomplamoose didn’t deserve to get on the plane to begin with, those plane-taking wankers. And there are those angry at Pomplamoose’s abilty to absorb a #loss-leading #tour because they’re making enough #sustainable #income through their #pledge-per-song system on #Patreon (a platform Conte started 2 years ago, because no #online system existed for #YouTube-star bands to convert millions of views into actual revenue). But he could afford to the lose the money! some musicians complained. This isn’t a fair representation of middle class touring at all!, others wrote. The indie bands who’d toured in vans, slept on floors, and had nothing but chips and salsa on their riders said things like These guys spent their money like idiots!

    The critics are partially correct: Conte’s accounting is not how they’ve toured, or might tour if given the same budget. But it is how Pomplamoose chose to tour: at a loss, and as an investment. If there was any naiveté in Jack’s post, it wasn’t in how the band spent their money but rather in his assumption that a compassionate universe was ready to accept his transparency as an important contribution to the music information economy instead of a mercenary gimmick promoting his own cause.

    But losing money on a mid-level tour is more common than anyone apparently thinks – it’s just that there are few artists masochistic enough to put the information transparently into the public domain.

    When The Dresden Dolls were invited to open up for Nine Inch Nails’ summer tour in 2005, we were ecstatic. We were offered $500 per show to perform about six shows a week. We had to hire a tour bus and driver (no amount of sleeping-in-the-van or cheap flights could match the speed of the NIN caravan), and we had to hire our own sound guy. I have not, until now, written about the huge loss we took on that tour, nor would I ever criticize Trent Reznor for not offering us a “living wage”. He made the offer; we didn’t have to take it. To this day, I still meet people who discovered my music because of that tour: they became fans, they supported my Kickstarter, they come to my shows, they bought my book. We figured we’d make it back when we went back on our own tour as headliners. And …we did.

    Risk-based investing exists everywhere but the arts (and, one could argue, in the non-profit world), where it is considered absolutely déclassé. In the tech industry – and the restaurant industry, or any industry, really – it is considered necessary to spend, experiment, fail, struggle, borrow capital and ultimately find a healthy balance between expenditure and income. Wired’s Erika Hall recently even wrote of the tech world that “Somewhere along the way, it got to be uncool to reduce one’s risk of failure.”

    Perhaps the stickiest problem when comparing art and business is that the definition of “success” becomes muddied when you opt for a career in music. On the one hand, you’re told you haven’t “made it” until you’re a megastar – making a living at your art isn’t enough – and, on the other hand, musicians aren’t supposed to be concerned with profits if they’re “real” artists – Didn’t you get into this job just for the love of it?

    I launched my now-infamous #Kickstarter for my own album, tour and art book in 2012 and, while it grossed over $1.2m, it netted – when all was said and done – close to zero. I actually chose to run the Kickstarter as a loss leader: I wanted to impress my fans, and the critics of crowdfunding who I knew were going to judge and criticize me - and the project - no matter what. I deliberately used high-end, expensive packages when manufacturing the CD-books, the vinyl, the hand-painted record players and art-books I’d convinced 25,000 people to #pre-purchase. I even wound up chronicling my projected budget. Why? Because there was a bizarre impression that I’d somehow been handed a million-dollar check and was going to spend my year languishing in a swimming pool filled with hundred dollar bills. But I hadn’t: like a shoe store, or a restaurant, I was running a business with the obligatory expenses, like a full staff on payroll, a shop to rent, and a million dollars worth of pre-ordered shoes to design, inspect, manufacture and mail out to my customers.

    Meanwhile, even as I was only breaking even on the Kickstarter with an optimistic vision of future earnings (which did eventually manifest as a larger fanbase, more profitable tours, and a book advance), I got widely raked over the coals in the media for not paying fans who’d volunteered to come to my show and play with me and the band for two or three songs in exchange for tickets, backstage beers and hugs. This wasn’t my salaried band or crew we’re talking about – these were local sax and violin players showing up for an impromptu jam session that lasted one evening. I’d been doing these sorts of trades for years and they’d worked out just fine for everyone, until people got the sense that I was a millionaire (or, at least the wife of one) running a rock’n’roll sweat shop.

    The irony? Some of the exact same journalists and bloggers are now lambasting Jack Conte for paying the professional musicians he hired to toured with Pomplamoose (which is usually a two-person band that use loops to fill out their sound). Will Stevenson, a band manager himself, asked in the Alternative Press: “But why would the rest of you and your band need salaries? If you aren’t making the money, why would you pay it out to people?”

    The backlash (Amanda, pay your volunteers! Jack, don’t pay your band!) is laughable, but it speaks volumes about the double standards with which the world tackles the #music_industry: you’re damned if you play by the rules, and you’re damned if you find a creative way to thwart them. We – Taylor Swift, Trent Reznor, Zoe Keating, Pomplamoose, U2, Radiohead, me – are all just trying to find a way to create and monetize our creations at the same time.

    And if there are going to be a million new paths to sustainability for a million different artists, we’d best stop bickering amongst ourselves about the validity of each and every path these artists are stumbling down – or at least step out of the way if we can’t lend a hand.

    • This article was amended on 14 December 2014 to clarify that Mick Jagger attended, but did not graduate from, the London School Of Economics.


  • Avec Contributor, Google veut financer les sites par le don
    http://www.nextinpact.com/news/91024-avec-contributor-google-veut-financer-sites-par-don.htm

    Si Google propose déjà de nombreux services payants, il a récemment proposé aux adeptes de YouTube de soutenir les producteurs de contenus via des dons. Aujourd’hui, le géant du web lance Contributor, un service qui vise à faire pareil avec n’importe quel site web. Le but ? Ne pas laisser Patreon et ses dérivés se renforcer, tout en misant sur un modèle à la Flattr.

    #Don #Financement_participatif #Flattr #Google #Google_Contributor #Modèle_économique #Numérique #Patreon #Tipeee #Web



  • How Youtube Stars Can Actually Make a Living | TIME
    http://time.com/3012914/patreon-kickstarter-youtube-crowdfunding

    This desire to get an inside track on the creation of a new project has already helped #Kickstarter pull in more than $1 billion in pledges from people around the world. Experts believe the Patreon model can also reach massive scale since it’s appealing to both creators and their fans. ““Here you can evaluate the quality of output over time and then decide whether you want to continue subscribing or not,” says Anindya Ghose, a professor of information, operation and management sciences at New York University who also studies crowdfunding. “It’s a very positive self-reinforcing cycle where people give small amounts of money, which incentivizes artists to do a better job, which then leads people to give more money more frequently.”

    Plenty of obstacles remain for the still-nascent startup. It’s not yet clear just how long people will be willing to continually support a single artist’s work—Ghose points out that a few popular creators pumping out subpar work simply to collect a check could sour new users on the platform. More worrying could be YouTube’s entrance into the donations space. The video giant launched a virtual tip jar of its own recently as a response to ongoing gripes that it’s hard to earn money directly on the site. For now, Conte contends that Patreon’s features differentiates it from YouTube’s less robust offering, while YouTube has expressed support for crowdfunding platforms like #Patreon and Kickstarter.

    Silicon Valley, at least, believes in Patreon’s future. The startup closed a $15 million round of venture funding in June which included leading venture capitalist Danny Rimer and Alexis Ohanian, one of the co-founders of Reddit. The money will allow the company to launch a mobile app and open an office in San Francisco instead of working out of the two-bedroom apartment where Conte and co-founder Sam Yam live.

    As Patreon grows, Conte promises that it will remain focused on creators’ interests. The currently unprofitable company charges a 5% commission on all donations, and Conte vows the fee won’t increase in the future (Kickstarter and YouTube charge the same amount). Though he’s now a CEO, he’s still a creator at heart—Conte has 1,300 patrons of his own paying more than $5,000 for each new video he makes. He envisions a future where every creative person isn’t a starving artist or a pop megastar. There’s room in the middle for artists, too, and people will pay for their work because, as Conte says, “Everybody wants to be able to enjoy beautiful things.”

    #crowd_founding #jack_conte #pomplamoose