I share many of your views on the broader vision. The current tools available for monetizing online content limit commerce to self-declared gatekeepers, as many of you from this community have repeatedly pointed that out.
Web Monetization is one of the tools which can help to open “free trades” for online content but it needs a broader infrastructure with a “toolbox” that also fixes inequality (among other issues). Even if a comprehensive toolset would be available to support the whole media industry ordinary creators would be still left behind. The tools need to be accessible globally.
Media industries have made a stride to established tools to facilitate commerce, for example, ISBN for books, ONIX for publications, IPTC for press, DDEX for music, and EIDR for broadcasting and movies. Those systems are generally limited to members. Nevertheless, new tools should not force those members to change infrastructures that took decades to implement.
Respect for rights is another pain point that needs a cure in our internet society. This topic is extremely broad and has lead to some of the most debated laws worldwide. The problem boils down - in my view - to the lack of a global infrastructure that could be used to determine the attribution and the associated rights of online content. Lawmakers were made to believe that it was not a feasible technical task. The key technologies are clearly available today.
We at CLink Media have been working on creating an interoperable, open infrastructure for asserting attribution and rights information, tools for legitimate reuse of digital content, and peer-to-peer monetization without third-party intermediaries. See our first post in the community and relevant links within.
We would be very interested to work with you, your team, and anyone in the community to share ideas and collaborate on building the “toolbox” for a better internet.
P.S. The first reference on your post shows a 404 error
you have interesting project going on. There are certain similarities with the SSI development going on currently. Where DID is similar identifier for various entities, main component for digital identity. Should it work with content as well? But it's evident that governing these registries is one of the bottleneck and hindering the development. Where the registries are, who has control over those.. Must take a closer look on your project. There are definitely some touching points were we could collaborate.
CLink - and DOA - is a distributed system. Trusted users can have a replica of the public data on their local instances while maintaining their private dataset (what they can flip to public with a click of the button). Consensus engine can be implemented on the instances having "write" capabilities to public data. It does also provide a way of producing hashes automatically on digital objects at deposit time, and if necessary linking one digital object to another (as a chain). From my view, governance is simpler, faster, and more scalable than writing identifiers to a public blockchain. Furthermore, the architecture provides a repository for metadata and payloads. For example, it can support communities to set their own rules on how to manage their data including what to make public and what to keep private.
DID initially started out for SSI inspired digital entities as you pointed out. Recently, it was extended to content. CLink does have a plan to support DID.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
I share many of your views on the broader vision. The current tools available for monetizing online content limit commerce to self-declared gatekeepers, as many of you from this community have repeatedly pointed that out.
Web Monetization is one of the tools which can help to open “free trades” for online content but it needs a broader infrastructure with a “toolbox” that also fixes inequality (among other issues). Even if a comprehensive toolset would be available to support the whole media industry ordinary creators would be still left behind. The tools need to be accessible globally.
Media industries have made a stride to established tools to facilitate commerce, for example, ISBN for books, ONIX for publications, IPTC for press, DDEX for music, and EIDR for broadcasting and movies. Those systems are generally limited to members. Nevertheless, new tools should not force those members to change infrastructures that took decades to implement.
Respect for rights is another pain point that needs a cure in our internet society. This topic is extremely broad and has lead to some of the most debated laws worldwide. The problem boils down - in my view - to the lack of a global infrastructure that could be used to determine the attribution and the associated rights of online content. Lawmakers were made to believe that it was not a feasible technical task. The key technologies are clearly available today.
We at CLink Media have been working on creating an interoperable, open infrastructure for asserting attribution and rights information, tools for legitimate reuse of digital content, and peer-to-peer monetization without third-party intermediaries. See our first post in the community and relevant links within.
We would be very interested to work with you, your team, and anyone in the community to share ideas and collaborate on building the “toolbox” for a better internet.
P.S. The first reference on your post shows a 404 error
Thanks Janos,
you have interesting project going on. There are certain similarities with the SSI development going on currently. Where DID is similar identifier for various entities, main component for digital identity. Should it work with content as well? But it's evident that governing these registries is one of the bottleneck and hindering the development. Where the registries are, who has control over those.. Must take a closer look on your project. There are definitely some touching points were we could collaborate.
Link should be fixed now.
Thank you Juha for your response.
CLink - and DOA - is a distributed system. Trusted users can have a replica of the public data on their local instances while maintaining their private dataset (what they can flip to public with a click of the button). Consensus engine can be implemented on the instances having "write" capabilities to public data. It does also provide a way of producing hashes automatically on digital objects at deposit time, and if necessary linking one digital object to another (as a chain). From my view, governance is simpler, faster, and more scalable than writing identifiers to a public blockchain. Furthermore, the architecture provides a repository for metadata and payloads. For example, it can support communities to set their own rules on how to manage their data including what to make public and what to keep private.
DID initially started out for SSI inspired digital entities as you pointed out. Recently, it was extended to content. CLink does have a plan to support DID.