Should we be Flattrd?
Ever so often I have wished there was a decent and established micropayment or donation system, which would allow me to conveniently donate small amounts of money via the interwebs. I’d actually pay 50ct or a Euro for one or the other article I read. I usually buy the software I use and for some free software I donated. I buy albums I got a copy of from someone when I really like the music or I buy my music from Bleep right away. I feel creators should be compensated for their creation.
On the other hand I dislike the idea of a content industry that sits in between and excercises control. I don’t like paying for the feeling that the consumer and the artist or creator are being ripped off. That is why I don’t buy CDs or DVDs any more.
Unfortunately there is no established money transfer system for small amounts of cash even though there seems to be a need for that. Lots of different projects have been started, none succeded.
Lately a new creators endorsment system has surfaced: Flattr. The Project name is an acronym for ‘being flattered’ and ‘Flatrate’. The idea is that you put a monthly amount of money into your account and spend that amount by clicking on endorsment buttons on web pages. Apart from the fact that this does not give you a fine control of how much you give for which creation, I see a couple of other problems.
The project has been started by the Pirate Bay people, which gives it high visibility and with that visibility possibly comes success. So far so good. The problem I see here is attitude. In blog posts we read statements like “we found a partner that actually had something we lacked – money!” … “We’re not gonna tell you from whom yet, since we like to mess with people a bit.”.
Sorry guys, the ‘we like to mess with people’ stuff was fine and funny as long as you messed with the lawers of big companies and as long as it was about the hide and seek game with the content industry. I can see that you are aiming for the very same ideals with a new approach and I totally second that move. But this is about peoples’ money. There is no room for fun and messing around.
It is obvious that in a money transaction system for small amounts, a share of the money has to go into the administration of the system. It is also obvious and okay, that this amount will likely be higher than the usual bank fees, because the individual transactions are small. I’m fine with that. But what I’d expect from a “has to be trusted third party” for my endorsments is absolute transparency. I would be willing to pay the flattr administration fee, as long as it is absolutely clear where the money is going. Full disclosure.
Another thing that bothers me with ths system is the fact that there will be an entity in private hands that will know which contents I like so much that I am actually willing to spend money for them, EVEN THOUGH I COULD CONSUME THEM FOR FREE. This entity will have the best personal profiles evar.
I wish there was a way I could pay for content with a sort of web cash. I don’t want anybody to know in detail what I paid for. Cash is anonymous. Digital transactions are not. My bank already knows enough about me and so does Amazon. That is why I try to avoid paying for stuff with my credit cards and always withdraw larger chunks of cash and spend it this way and this is why I support the local bookstore at the corner. Granted, then this bookstore knows what I bought, but their database is small and it is not being transferred into the USA where there is nearly no privacy protection.
I have been pondering about this for while, trying to come up with a system based on whatever, public keys, signatures or whatnot, which would allow to spend money on something via a third party that has the following charactersitics:
- The creator receives the endorsment and can see for which product it has been payed, be it article, song or picture.
- The creator can not identify me or start assembling a profile by aggregating subsequent endorsments made by me. No profile identifier please.
- The third party does not know which product I payed for. Knowing the respective creator would be tolerable, but knowing how much money I payed for which exact text, song or picture is not.
- The third party should be sure that the creator can not cheat and collect money that has not actually been payed for by an endorser.
- Transparency. I would like to be able to see afterwards, how much money of my endorsment actually made it to the creator and how much has been chewed away by the transaction fee.
So upon clicking the ‘yes I like this blog post, donate 50ct for this.’ the software should:
- communicate the amount of the endorsment to the creator. Signed with a temprary transaction key.
- communicate the amount of the endorsment and the creator to the third party, signed by me and with the transaction key.
- communicate the amount from the third party to the creator, signed with the transaction key.
This way the creator gets two information streams about the money that is really being spend and can run statistics for the product. The third party knows how much money to transfer to the creator and to withdraw from which account, but does not know what product it is for, unless the two of them combine their databases. The transaction keys allow me to review the transaction afterwards. On the third party side to whom I payed and at the creators side, what I payed for.
I am not sure whether there is a logical flaw in there. Please hack away in the comments.
Your idea would not work. It is already there – see “donate” button.
Secondly -you don’t decide how much money you paid to one author, you only decide how much money you pay in total, and you decide that.
Prices and administrative expenses should be really low, why they should not?
Third and most important – shut your doors, disconnect internet, mobile phone, etc. Otherwise expect no privacy. Welcome to modern world! (You are not using google, eh?)