←back to thread

Subvert – Collectively owned music marketplace

(subvert.fm)
226 points cloudfudge | 3 comments | 18 Oct 24 16:17 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
ozornin ◴[18 Oct 24 17:21 UTC] No.41881508[source]▶
What exactly is meant by co-ownership in your case? What exact "Ability to influence platform policies and features" would I have and how are product/business decisions made? What is the organisation structure?

The phrase "Collective ownership" sounds romantic but it can mean many things, from very good to outright scam, depending on implementation.

replies(2): >>41881566 #>>41883721 #
1. n-exploit ◴[18 Oct 24 17:26 UTC] No.41881566[source]▶
It's structured as a multi-stakeholder cooperative, from what I understand.

"Building an artist-owned platform is a complex challenge, but it’s one we are uniquely positioned to solve. Our growing coalition includes founders of Ampled, a project that helped pioneer the concept of cooperative platforms, as well as artists, music industry professionals, and specialists in cooperative law and platform economics. "

From a introductory blog post.

https://subvert.fm/blog/a-collectively-owned-bandcamp-succes...

More on the co-op model in the FAQ.

https://subvert.fm/docs/what-does-it-mean-to-join-the-co-op/

replies(1): >>41881616 #
2. factormeta ◴[18 Oct 24 17:30 UTC] No.41881616[source]▶
would this be like open-collective for musicians?
replies(1): >>41881701 #
3. n-exploit ◴[18 Oct 24 17:39 UTC] No.41881701[source]▶
I could see the economics working similar to OpenCollective, but different governance. I know OC announced a restructuring recently, but I don't think it's a co-op model.