There was a big critical response yesterday on Twitter to my tweet about the creative potential of NFTs. Wow! Did I open a can of worms! I was expecting a couple of desultory Likes, then for my tweet to quietly slide into obscurity.
The previous evening I’d enjoyed a very informative and inspiring chat with writers, poets and publishers about what our tiny corner of the blockchain world could look like: the implications for intellectual property rights, for community building, for fomenting creative relationships, and for building businesses free of the platform giants that have a stranglehold over independent creators.
The previous evening I’d enjoyed a very informative and inspiring chat with writers, poets and publishers about what our tiny corner of the blockchain world could look like: the implications for intellectual property rights, for community building, for fomenting creative relationships, and for building businesses free of the platform giants that have a stranglehold over independent creators.
I’ve been looking into NFTs for a while now and have specifically dived deep into the publishing aspect. But of course, the Tech Bro, Bored Ape, get-rich-quick, speculative aspect of this world hasn’t escaped me. It’s the beginning of a long journey and I’m still learning.
I even watched a very detailed, highly regarded critique of cryptocurrency, blockchain and NFTs, so I assure you all I’m not hiding my head in the sand:
I don’t see the crazy world of insane prices for shitty jpeg NFTs as anything to do with the world of book NFTs. We’re not interested in bigging up a digital file to con other people into thinking it’s worth something.
Maybe the best thing to do is give you some examples of what we’re looking at here, which is very different to the shady stuff you’re worried about.
Firstly, there are emerging communities of artists, writers, poets and musicians that are using NFTs as a platform and a new medium. Small, independent creators – beyond the world of comics – are really excited about this stuff. They aren’t Tech Bros. They’re not speculators trying to make a fast buck, or rip-off merchants.
The indie publishing community is already exploring how NFTs can be harnessed as new way of publishing. Author Joanna Penn has a great discussion on her podcast:
For a good overview, check out this article published by the highly respected Alliance of Independent Authors.
It’s such early days, no one knows the full scope and how it’s all going to shake out, but some key benefits I can already see include:
- The ability to create limited digital editions, e.g. 150 signed copies of a book with additional bonus material such as the audiobook version, a variant cover, a new chapter, or a limited edition digital art print.
- Having a smart contract attached to the book NFT, that ensures we earn a percentage whenever it is resold. This is revolutionary!
- The option to send bonus content in the future to the buyer of your NFT. That bonus content could be a new chapter or story, new artwork, or even an invitation to an event, or a one-to-one creative jamming session.
- The option to award a percentage of the earnings to each NFT holder. This is already happening in the music industry.
This is just the beginning. There are doubtless endless ways to add genuine value to the NFT ‘bundle’.
To only see the scammy, pyramid scheme side of NFTs is not looking at the bigger picture. On a corporate scale, DC, Marvel and Disney (to name a few) are already doing NFT collectibles, and whilst we’re no fans of them, it’s clearly going to extend into publishing and become mainstream sooner or later, like it or not.
Reese Witherspoon’s Hello Sunshine media company just announced last month a new partnership with World of Women NFT collective:
It’s only a matter of time before Amazon offers an NFT version of books alongside their Kindle edition. Ebay have already started. It would be a crying shame if indie comic creators stayed away from these developments, wouldn’t it? The rest of the publishing world can move forward, but comics can’t?
There is no way of avoiding the capitalist system. Hence publishing on Amazon, where we have no control over our account and do not know who our customers are. And customers who buy one of our Kindle books or comics do not own it: they just have a licence to read it. If they do something to piss off Amazon and get their account suspended, that’s it: they’ve lost all their books, not to mention their music, TV shows and movies.
I’m aware of how some artists have been ripped off by NFT pirates, and that’s appalling. But there are pirates, scammers and liggers in every creative arena. Pat’s been ripped off by publishers and creators. It goes with the territory, unfortunately.
Coming on to the environmental aspect, I should first say that I have skin in the game here. I’ve got a masters in Conservation Management and have worked in the field for several years for Essex Wildlife Trust and Essex Ecology Services. I do give a very big fuck about this stuff.
So a vital aspect of NFTs for me is choosing the right platform.
I’m currently looking at Soltype, which runs on the Solana blockchain, which has a decent energy record:
“Solana has revealed its network energy consumption statistics for November show a standard SOL transaction now only consumes 1,837 Joules of energy – fewer than two Google searches.”
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/one-solana-transaction-uses-little-114956337.html
So while I’m doing due diligence, it’s pretty chilling to discover that we can’t even discuss NFTs on Twitter without getting scorn poured on our heads, or warned that we will lose readers if we even consider it. It doesn’t feel democratic. In fact, it’s autocratic.
Just to be clear: we are looking at the possibilities of NFTs to help us and our fellow creators grow and carry on creating, at a difficult time of economic squeeze where organic reach is shrinking, advertising is increasingly expensive and the algorithms call the shots.
What we’re proposing to do is an NFT test on one of our text books, probably Be Pure! Be Vigilant! Behave! It’ll be a learning curve. Maybe we’ll have to build a new following around it, so that we don’t upset some of our existing readership? But it seems wrong to actually condemn us for researching publishing options.
Like it’s not allowed to be discussed or considered.
But if there’s a significant number of British comic fans that still feel hostile – despite the strong case laid out here – then we have to acknowledge that. Equally, it would be nice if they would acknowledge that it’s a viewpoint that doesn’t resonate elsewhere in publishing or other creative industries. My own view is that in two or three years time, everyone will wonder what all the fuss was about.
Meanwhile, I think it’s best to leave it there.
Surely limited digital editions can already be sold? Simply limiting the transaction number for a file sold is selling a limited edition, no?
Revenue coming in from digital resale relies upon the limitation of digital editions, I suppose. I can’t imagine how supply/demand will shake out on that and I suppose my strong aversion to the idea of buying a secondhand file is personal or, effectively, cultural. Perhaps it won’t or shouldn’t be shared by others.
The ability to send additional content to buyers is already present though independent platforms. Why would this be a particular selling point for creators, though?
Selling particularly expensive NFTs on the strength of their containing royalty rights seems like a weird economy. What’s the comics equivalent to streaming? Where would those royalties be accruing? Isn’t crowdfunding-style “get it and a bonus” NFT-less tiered pricing a safer bet?
The argument that everyone else is doing it and it will be normal soon is hard to take. A lot of people do a lot of things; that doesn’t mean seeing more people do them is automatically cool! You know this, undoubtedly, and I’m sorry to put these words to you as a counter—it just feels that uncomfortable to hear as your argument in favour of the stuff.
Solana using only the energy of almost 1000 American households is not easy to hear as “very little” honestly. Perhaps in relation to other comparable technologies it is! But “let’s add all this” does not feel-sound *good.*
As to your comments about twitter response—would you rather NOT be warned about dangers ahead? Is it autocratic to make a forecast?
Hi Claire, thanks for your questions and thoughts.
1. Limited digital editions: yes I can theoretically sell x number of PDFs on a storefront such as Gumroad, but every file that is sold can also in theory be resold or shared multiple times, so although my intention may be to limit the numbers, it’s completely beyond my control how many copies end up in the world.
2. It’s really interesting that that you have a strong aversion to buying a ‘secondhand file’ – I’m genuinely curious about this. Secondhand to me sort of suggest something a little worn, or not quite shiny and new. Pre-loved, as they now market it, lol! But yes, as you say, revenue from digital resale is dependent on the limitation of digital editions.
3. Not sure about this point? The comics equivalent to streaming would be…. a subscription model? such as Comixology Unlimited, which we already use on our Requiem series? The royalties would accrue in the digital wallet owned by the person who bought the NFT. Is crowdfunding a safer bet? A safer bet for who, for what? We could have crowdfunding with bonus stuff, AND we could have NFTs, for those people who want them, in a separate space, so people who don’t like NFTs don’t have to look at them, or the mention of them.
4. If lots of people are buying NFTs and like them, and want quality ones that actually contain some real content (eg a decent comic story), why not make it available for them? Yes, I agree, lots of people doing things does not make it cool. For example, playing massive multiplayer games online and spending money on avatars to use in them. I think that is a waste of time and it is also a huge issue for energy consumption. I will never do it. But I know a lot of people get a lot of pleasure from doing it. And it’s here to stay.
5. Can you be more precise re: Solana energy = almost 1000 American households? Is that regarding transactions, is it annual…? I’m not sure what the parameters are. And just as an aside, do you and everyone else spend as much time thinking about the energy usage of everything you do online? I’d love to see some ‘easy to read’ comparison tables showing the energy consumption for things we all do on a daily or weekly basis, and take for granted. Eg all the 1 gigabyte files I uploaded to Comixology, the 100 gig of data I store on Google Drive, or a 10-minute video call. From a personal point of view, I spent a large part of my adult life not driving a car, mostly using public transport or cycling, and buying a lot of secondhand clothes and household goods. I’m fairly plant-based in my diet, or I try to eat locally produced meat, and low in the food chain. I do my bit. I know that one of the biggest sources of environmental destruction (and there are so many) is the industrial war complex. The environmental and social cost of war is ENORMOUS. Arms manufacturers are the scourge of the earth. I could go on and on and on….Nestle, Bayer Monsanto, energy giants…the scale of the harm done by these corporations is colossal. So I do take umbrage at being scolded by a bunch of people online for daring to sell some NFTs.
6. Always happy to hear what people think. Not so great having outraged comments using emotional blackmail and warning us that we’ll lose customers if we sell NFTs. It feels very controlling and very oppressive.
I have literally never heard of anyone re-selling a digital file that they’ve bought from Gumroad, or anywhere. It seems completely outlandish honestly—just “not done” in the literal sense! As far as I’m aware—limits apply—the only reselling of digital product that’s ever done is because of the pyramid economy of NFTs specifically: as “Trading” rather than as practical, functional file use.
My question about the equivalence of streaming was an actual question, not some sort of facetious gotcha, so thank you for answering it. The plan, then, would be to continue selling or leasing or whatever—providing access to—normal, non-NFT copies, whose revenue is split to repay (essentially) the investment of the big-money NFT buyer? Micro-investors, confined to the NFT marketplace?
I don’t necessarily follow this as an argument in your point’s favour: “I think [purchaseable MMORPG avatars] is a waste of time and it is also a huge issue for energy consumption. I will never do it. But I know a lot of people get a lot of pleasure from doing it. And it’s here to stay.” You mean, you’re not protesting against people who offer these purchase options?
The Solana American households number was from the link you provided about Solana; I don’t have any more info than you do there.
I do think about my existing energy consumption, yeah.With ambivalence and several layers of concern. It’s kind of a reason why adding to it seems super bad—and making adding to it “easier,” socially or functionally, seems such a major negative.
I do appreciate that it feels bad to be scorned. I don’t think that being warned about losing customers is necessarily, or in the most cases here, being emotionally blackmailed, because it’s a genuine current probability, but I am sorry for the shock and the unexpected nature of the negativity you experienced as a harbinger of NFT normalisation. I’m sorry for your bad time.
It’s jarring, from the perspective of many of your current or existing readers, to see “Oh well, everyone’s doing it, may as well profit” coming *specifically* from Pat Mills—perhaps this is our mistake, confusing our image of the body of work with… anything else. Genuinely, this may be the case, and disentangling those feelings and expectations might take a minute. I’d imagine the majority of us do want you (and the rest of us, in “the comics scene” at large) to make a comfortable living. We have parallel concerns, there has been much, much discussion of blockchain technology and NFTs in various lights throughout the scene and the community and the major concerns that have built up and been discovered aren’t easy to dissolve.
I think your reasoning is legitimate enough, although some points you’re excited about make me cringe a little as a consumer. I just don’t think you’ll escape the opportunistic cash grab nature of the industry trying it on, using other companies as a reason for you to do it doesn’t really make it any better.
I can only speak for myself but even if you were to run it like the stellar chap that you are, as a consumer supporting the concept I’d feel I’m supporting a framework that wants to exploit every little bit of cash out of me that it can. There’s so many larger companies using it horribly, or looking to, that it is quite disheartening to see how little people think of one another.
No matter how well and honourable you used it, I don’t think I’d touch it with a 10 foot pole. Would I be angry? No. Heck more power to you… but I would be somewhat disappointed.
It’s great that you conclude you’ll have to cultivate a new fanbase to hawk NFTs to, since your current fanbase clearly won’t stand for it. If you’re that dedicated to NFTs, more power to you. I don’t particularly consider “the case laid out here” to be “strong” (and you’d have points docked if you wrote that in your conclusion for a persuasive essay in a school environment), but clearly you think your reasoning is quite impenetrable. You watched a two hour video on the dangers and harms and grift of NFTs, and concluded “well sure, THEY use NFTs like that, but OURS will be different!” If that’s your conclusion, best of luck betting on the future of digital art distribution. I suppose in 2-3 years, we’ll see who was “right.”
Thanks for writing, Andy. It would also be great if you specifically addressed some of my points, so I know exactly what it is about our plans that upset you so?
This is why I don’t do Twitter – it tends towards the shouting down of ideas rather than the exploration of them.
While you and I have very different views regarding copyright and intellectual property, on the subject of NFTs I think we are in broad agreement. Anything that keeps the creators’ power with the creators and not the industry monoliths is a Good Thing.
Thanks for the calm response – appreciate it!