Defining the value proposition and incentive mechanism for Data Providers

[revelator-labs]

Background

Under the current proposed design,

1. IP owners (of an ISRC or ISWC) have the sole authority to connect an agreement to one of several rights types (to perform, to reproduce, to distribute, etc…) to their asset
2. An agreement will always refer to a specific IP asset and will always include at least one rights type.
3. Payment Providers and Data Providers have the sole authority to create an agreement, but it needs to be authorized by the rights holders in order for the protocol to show it as valid, and distribute payments to this agreement (see 1)
4. The protocol will ensure no agreement can be created if the same IP is monetizing the same rights under conflicting terms; The agreements are held in a private database owned by the service provider, but with an authorization of the IP owner (which can be granted against payment as well), anyone can ask the protocol a question about one of the agreement terms and get a y/n answer.

The Proposed Agreement Terms are:

• rights being licensed PUBLIC
• start date - end date PRIVATE
• Revenue_type (source of stream) [ARRAY] PRIVATE
• Revenue_country_ISO PRIVATE
• Share_Percentage [0.000-100.000] PRIVATE
• Revenue_source (optional) (platform where asset was monetized)* PRIVATE
• Legal_document_hash (optional) PRIVATE
• Waterfall (conditional logic) (optional) PRIVATE

• • Revenue_source info may be hard to normalize...

--

Meeting Agenda / Revelator Labs

In the early days of the protocol we will have to trust the Payment Providers/Data Providers (distributors and royalty societies) that they have the right to monetize the asset but in the long run we want to hand of the authentication of that agreement to the rightful owners, so they don’t need to rely on service providers to share or migrate data.
Rights holders will be able to get a validation of their assets' authenticity and performance, which they can leverage for any business or liquidity need and update rights holders with a few clicks, wihtout needing any action from their service providers who keep safeguarding their data.

Our goal is to incentivize existing service providers in the music industry to sync their current workflow with a global registry, with the benefits being

1. preserves the privacy and integrity of their customer's data
2. Empowers their their customers with self custody which achieves 2 goals: (i) allowing artists to monetize and collaborate more easily, and (ii) creates new mechanisms for the service provider's data is monetized.

TBD:

1. Review the Role of Data Providers / Payment Providers and the use of staking

2. Understand the Value proposition for Royalty Societies and Distributors

3. What other data providers? (Publishing admins? Record Labels? Broadcast monitoring agencies… (Nielsen)? Sync Licensing Metrics?, etc…)

4. Coordinate between the technical implementation, how it is presented to potential partners and how it is resented to the world web3 music industry

[revelator-labs]

1. Staking should be explored as a later phase for opening up the protocol
2. Josh to help with re-wording the messaging: make more money, protect member's repertoire