Yes that's right, the Phoenicia player's guide is now in layout! One of the interesting things about this player's guide is that there isn't going to be an image of the city with it's falls. The problem is: No one in their right mind has built a thriving city around a waterfall yet, especially one as big as a cataract fall complex.
The cataract waterfall is actually inspired by Iguazu Falls in both Argentina and Brazil. Although Mosi-oa-Tunya ("The Smoke that Thunders"), also known as Victoria Falls, is also an inspiration.
Why would a thriving city be built around a cataract? Well, people do dumb things. But the major reason is the Lemurian Obsidian pyramid located under the major spill way. Made of Orgonite, the pyramid attracts both Arcane Spellcasters and psions. Fortunately, the psions got there first and started to build a magnificent city. However, in real life, the practical problems of flooding and noise pollution (from the falls) are practically tough to overcome. So, city builders had too many problems with cities centralized around waterfalls.
Q. Why a city of Psionics in Pathfinder?
A. Everyone needs a city that they can drop in their campaigns without a fuss. Phoenicia, and it's three sister cities -- Sybaris and Syracuse; are designed so that the Game Master can do just that. This allows you to explore psionics at your leisure if your players or you -- the GM -- enjoys the system.
Q. Why don't you just add it to Glorion?
A. Are you nuts? No Author in his right mind would submit his work to Paizo and sign a work for hire agreement when the Internet -- the world's most powerful and easiest Copying Machine -- is still operational. I'll take my chances with releasing it under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
Q. Why a Creative Commons License?
A. Why not? With a creative commons license, major companies can compete with me directly. So everyone wins.
Wizards of the Coast wins, because they can create a game book derivative of mine.
Paizo wins because they can do the same.
Same for Dreamscarred Press.
Steve Jackson Games.
And a host of other companies. Plus, the city can reach an amazing amount of gamers. So I win, and you win. You can get an official 4e product and play Phoenicia with official 4e guidelines. Or you can get an official Exalted product and play Phoenicia with Exalted. Plus, gamers can translate it into their favorite languages and the translations can compete with each other. Again. Everyone wins.
Q. Are you nuts?
A. No, I am not. But please, don't flood my email box asking for permission, I'll get frustrated with you all.
Showing posts with label Creative Commons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Creative Commons. Show all posts
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Monday, May 2, 2011
Making Money as a Cobbler
Again, Karl Fogel is more eloquent than I. So, this is how she earns money from the Sita Sings the Blues distribution project.
-----
The Sita Distribution Project is a public demonstration of how an artist can flourish — economically and artistically — by letting her works circulate for free.
It's not about self-distribution, it's about audience-distribution: put the work out there, let people share it, give them the freedom to organize activities (both commercial and non-commercial) around it, and the artist will benefit, because audiences want to support artists. Our goal is a comprehensible, repeatable model that can be used by independent artists everywhere.
The test subject is artist Nina Paley (now our Artist-in-Residence), who released her award-winning, feature-length animated film Sita Sings the Blues to the world under a totally free license in early 2009. That's free as in "freedom": anyone can make copies, anyone can sell copies, anyone can hold a screening (for profit or otherwise), anyone can make related merchandise, no one needs to ask permission for anything.
Best of all, her income stream is fairly steady. This is the opposite of the traditional "burst and fade" distribution model that so many works endure, dragged out of circulation prematurely to avoid competing with new releases from the same publisher. Because Nina's film is audience-distributed, it's in circulation forever, whenever and wherever people want to see it. And all those audience members are potential customers and donors, as the financial results bear out.
Raw data: While we have to protect the privacy of donors and customers at the online store, we can release summary data and anonymized data. Please see the donations summary, store sales summary, and the store sales details. We're sharing this data in order to give other independent artists some concrete numbers about what a freedom-based distribution model can bring.
Nina Paley's preliminary report from five months after the free release of her film, including the talk she gave at DIY in Philadelphia.
See also The More She Shared, The More She Made by Mike Masnick at TechDirt, for a good writeup of the talk.
--------------------
Sharing your work is good, sharing your work is rewarding. I hope all of this will help certain people see my point of view. Coming soon: Another Preview of Phoenicia. :)
-----
The Sita Distribution Project is a public demonstration of how an artist can flourish — economically and artistically — by letting her works circulate for free.
It's not about self-distribution, it's about audience-distribution: put the work out there, let people share it, give them the freedom to organize activities (both commercial and non-commercial) around it, and the artist will benefit, because audiences want to support artists. Our goal is a comprehensible, repeatable model that can be used by independent artists everywhere.
The test subject is artist Nina Paley (now our Artist-in-Residence), who released her award-winning, feature-length animated film Sita Sings the Blues to the world under a totally free license in early 2009. That's free as in "freedom": anyone can make copies, anyone can sell copies, anyone can hold a screening (for profit or otherwise), anyone can make related merchandise, no one needs to ask permission for anything.
The Results So Far
So far, Nina has made more money by this method than any traditional (i.e., exclusive) distributor was offering before the film's release. Since releasing it for free distribution in February of 2009, she's received approximately $28,000 in donations and another $25,000 in sales of DVDs and other film-related merchandise from the online store. (Note that the donations are dedicated to paying back music licensing fees she had to pay to be able to release the film at all; there's more on that here.) The average donation is a bit over $10 US (but that's not counting the rare outliers, the occasional donations of $500 or $1000 -- if you include those, the average donation is around $30).Best of all, her income stream is fairly steady. This is the opposite of the traditional "burst and fade" distribution model that so many works endure, dragged out of circulation prematurely to avoid competing with new releases from the same publisher. Because Nina's film is audience-distributed, it's in circulation forever, whenever and wherever people want to see it. And all those audience members are potential customers and donors, as the financial results bear out.
Raw data: While we have to protect the privacy of donors and customers at the online store, we can release summary data and anonymized data. Please see the donations summary, store sales summary, and the store sales details. We're sharing this data in order to give other independent artists some concrete numbers about what a freedom-based distribution model can bring.
The Recipe
This distribution model puts the artist squarely on the audience's side: instead of telling people they shouldn't share, the artist encourages them to share. But the key is to do more than just put the work out there and hope for the best. You have to set up infrastructure that makes the artist the focal point for economic activity around the work — not the exclusive owner of all economic activity, just the focal point. Instead of imposing a monopoly on the work itself (which pits artist against audience), let the work flow freely and take advantage of the one natural monopoly that comes from being the artist: attribution, that is, credit for having made the work. Audiences appreciate proper attribution, and will enforce it, because they want to be on the artist's side. So:- Make it very easy for people to donate to you. Remember, if your work is good, some percentage of your audience will want to support you.
- Sell containers, not content (see Understanding Free Content for more: either on the QCO site or below).
For example, the Sita Sings the Blues Merchandise Empire sells DVDs, t-shirts, pins, stickers, and other merchandise. It also makes clear exactly what percentage of the money is going to the artist — people want to know this! While some of the items sold are utilitarian (a DVD is a more convenient way to have the movie), many of them occupy the grey area between utility and "karma value": people purchase them because they want to show their appreciation of the work to others, and they know that their purchase benefits the artist. (Think of why people who go to a concert will buy the band's CD there, even when they know they can download all the songs online for free. It's the same thing.) Don't worry about someone else setting up a store; you're the artist, people want the stuff to come straight from the source, and in any case you have first-mover advantage. - Encourage commercial activity around the work, and give people a clear route to include the artist on the proceeds.
For example, people hold screenings of Sita Sings the Blues and charge admission. Often, they'll send Nina Paley a percentage of the proceeds — even though they don't have to do it, they do. Again, people want to support artists. All artists have to do is make it clear that they're on the audience's side, and audiences will reward them for it.
- License your endorsement.
If you are an artist, your reputation travels with your work, and grows with your work's. That reputation cannot be replicated and cannot be diluted — it's a natural monopoly, so use it!
Tell distributors they can claim to be endorsed by you, the artist, as long as they share a certain percentage of revenue with you. Given a choice between two distributors, one that is clearly sharing profits with the artist and one that is not, people will choose the former. Distributors know that, and in any case they want artists to succeed too. (Another way to say it is: middlemen perform a valuable service, but they perform it better without a monopoly.)
- Encourage the audience to get involved: the people who do get involved will really appreciate it, and even those who don't will sense that there's something interesting going on.
For example, the subtitles on the commercial DVDs of Sita Sings the Blues were done by volunteers who coordinated on a wiki.
- Encourage remixture and re-use — it will only help spread the word about your work.
Some of our favorite examples: a fashion line and this truly stunning film-as-print re-use from Bill Cheswick.
Nina Paley's preliminary report from five months after the free release of her film, including the talk she gave at DIY in Philadelphia.
See also The More She Shared, The More She Made by Mike Masnick at TechDirt, for a good writeup of the talk.
--------------------
Sharing your work is good, sharing your work is rewarding. I hope all of this will help certain people see my point of view. Coming soon: Another Preview of Phoenicia. :)
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Legal Information added!
This blog is officially protected by the 
The Atlantis Blog by Elton J. Robb is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. And it is creator endorsed.
You are encouraged, but not required, to link back back to this article when using the marks online: http://questioncopyright.org/creator_endorsed_mark.
The Atlantis Blog by Elton J. Robb is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. And it is creator endorsed.
Use and enforcement: The trademarks for these marks will be registered and held by QuestionCopyright.org.
We define a "creator" to be the original copyright holder of the work, or in the case of public domain works, the person or entity that held the original copyright.
Any creator is free to grant others use of the marks in connection with the distribution of that creator's work. Anyone other than the creator is free to use the appropriate mark when distributing works by that creator, so long as the creator has given permission for ("endorsed") the use in question and the conditions for the mark continue to be met.
The creator may at any time prohibit a particular party from using the marks in reference to that creator's work(s). (This gives creators a way to avoid being associated with distributors or causes that they do not approve of. The distributor might still distribute the work without the mark, but there will be no implication that the creator endorses that distribution.)
QuestionCopyright.org retains the right to alter these terms or the terms for any particular use in its sole discretion, which it may be likely to do if it finds that the use of the mark(s) is confusing or otherwise misleading.
Nothing in these terms of use grants you permission to distribute a work on terms other than those granted by the relevant copyright holder(s).
You may resize the marks, as long as their vertical and horizontal proportions remain the same, and you may change their foreground and/or background colors.
We define a "creator" to be the original copyright holder of the work, or in the case of public domain works, the person or entity that held the original copyright.
Any creator is free to grant others use of the marks in connection with the distribution of that creator's work. Anyone other than the creator is free to use the appropriate mark when distributing works by that creator, so long as the creator has given permission for ("endorsed") the use in question and the conditions for the mark continue to be met.
The creator may at any time prohibit a particular party from using the marks in reference to that creator's work(s). (This gives creators a way to avoid being associated with distributors or causes that they do not approve of. The distributor might still distribute the work without the mark, but there will be no implication that the creator endorses that distribution.)
QuestionCopyright.org retains the right to alter these terms or the terms for any particular use in its sole discretion, which it may be likely to do if it finds that the use of the mark(s) is confusing or otherwise misleading.
Nothing in these terms of use grants you permission to distribute a work on terms other than those granted by the relevant copyright holder(s).
You may resize the marks, as long as their vertical and horizontal proportions remain the same, and you may change their foreground and/or background colors.
You are encouraged, but not required, to link back back to this article when using the marks online: http://questioncopyright.org/creator_endorsed_mark.
Labels:
Creative Commons,
Creator Endorsed,
Legal
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
