Re: <nettime> crowd-funding on nettime

[Felix Stalder <felix@openflows.com>]

I haven't fully made up my mind yet when it comes to crowd-funding
(CF).

There are some definitely positive potentials to it. For example, it
point towards a cultural economy that does not depend on the standard
copyright model where investments in the first copy are regained
through controlling subsequent copies.

But in practice, as far as I can see, there are relatively few
projects on kickstarter that actually release their products under
a free license once they have been financed in advance. So, in the
kickstarter version of CF, rather then offering a replacement for
copyright based markets, it's simply an addition to them. This I find
rather problematic.

The second aspect, which Keith points out below, is that it offers a
different cultural economy where the money flows are not separated
from the flows of cultural appreciation. Now, one can see that
either as an expansion of the economic into the social/cultural (a
Habermasian invasion of the "system world" into the "life world"),
or, which is Keith's view, as a new form of social economy. I kind
of lean towards the second, and what I like best about CF is that it
highlights the way even individual cultural production is embedded
into a wider social context. Not just metaphorically, but directly and
materially.

But again, in practice, on kickstarter, this potential is really
stifled, since it's so geared towards raising money. I like other
systems, like goteo.org [1], much better, since they really seek
to advance all forms of embedding, of which a voluntary financial
contribution is but one. This really point towards a social economy,
whereas kickstarter does not.

Or, does it? In my optimistic days, I think that even kickstarter
does it, even though it's clearly not designed to do it. But perhaps
the tide of social chance is so strong that such design questions
matter less. Kickstarter would then simply help to establish a radical
new principle, by dressing it up as something rather simple. Once a
certain social learning has taken place, then others, such as goteo,
could built on that an expand it much further. Kind of from Napster to
Bit-torrent.

But I don't feel optimistic all days.

Felix


[1] http://www.shareable.net/blog/crowdfunding-the-commons-interview



On 08/27/2012 08:27 PM, Keith Hart wrote:
> Capitalism's moral economy is based on the separation of a sphere
> where money is paid from one where it is not. This leads to a
> fetishized notion that money has the power to transform social
> relations. I would not make the money issue decisive in this case.
> The mods should decide on the basis of the intellectual quality of a
> bid for crowdfunding. If it is little better than spam, kick it out.
> Otherwise let us decide if we want to read it or not. It doesn't take
> long to make a decision of that sort, maybe 5-10 seconds.
>
> Keith




--

--- http://felix.openflows.com ------------------------ books out now:
*|Vergessene Zukunft. Radikale Netzkulturen in Europa. transcript 2012
*|Deep Search. The Politics of Searching Beyond Google. Studienv. 2009
*|Mediale Kunst/Media Arts Zurich.13 Positions. Scheidegger&Spiess2008
*|Manuel Castells and the Theory of the Network Society.Polity P. 2006
*|Open Cultures and the Nature of Networks. Ed Futura / Revolver, 2005


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org