Playback speed
×
Share post
Share post at current time
0:00
/
0:00

No one wants to enslave your digital avatar (sorry)

#DailySignals - Your 2 minute preview of the future

Today I look at digital avatar rights - who has them, who's selling them and who, ultimately, will get paid.

It looks at how A-list celebrities are happily writing $$$ deals to licence their digital likenesses to studios - in perpetuity, some, and more limited, others - at the same time as lower wage, less known actors are panicking and striking about a future where they (rightly) suspect they will fast become practically free (and free-use) commodities.

First - a disclaimer, I'm no expert on this subject, but Tracey Follows is, so follow her for deeper insights. I am, however, an economist. And the economics of this debate.

Like with music streaming, as much as Taylor Swift & the swifties like to complain that streaming screws over artists (and it does! just not the high paid ones favoured by the algorithms...) - well, she's richer than ever (as are her investors). This is because AI and digital-everything is a WINNER TAKES ALL, zero-sum market where the most famous get more famous, and the rest of us become, for all intents and purposes, valueless interchangeable commodities.

Just like with our personal data that is "exploited" by big tech companies to subsidise our entertainment and consumption desires, but is not worth very much in $ terms at all (certainly not enough to fund a liveable wage UBI, sorry everyone) - our digital likeness rights might just not be worth stealing or exploiting at all...

Your thoughts? On digital likeness rights and values?

Ore how about on the Matthew-effect digital economy? -Is there a way to stop the acceleration of gross attention (and, now that attention is, thanks to web3, explicitly priced and fungible with "real" money), financial inequality?

Let me know!

Share Thoughts

Read more:

Discussion about this video

Thoughts
Thoughts
Authors
Bronwyn Williams