We need to make this thing open and flexible enough to allow readers (and listeners, and viewers, in the cases of audio and video content) and the marketplace to decide for themselves.

It is essential that we discover what works for the marketplace. That can’t be done if the marketplace remains under the control of the sellers alone, and in many different ways. (And, if they all collude for one way, that risks antitrust scrutiny.)

EmanciPay will do exactly what you describe, if the user wants it to.

For many decades, over-the-air radio (in the U.S.) has only compensated composers, through payments to BMI, ASCAP and SESAC. Over-the-Net radio stations, by terms outlined through the DMCA and now set by the Copyright Royalty Board, are required to pay the RIAA through SoundExchange for artists (actually, their labels — the copyright holders) on a per-listener, per-recording basis).

The Net is not too far out of the gate for any model. That’s why we’re doing both ListenLog (a personal usage tracker — for the user himself or herself) and EmanciPay (a way for users to decide what to pay, to whom, and how — any way they like).

But what about the concept of a person setting aside a sum of money to go to original creators and maybe a slice for aggregators etc who add value along the way ?

Radio uses this model for artists to get their cut.

The net is probably too far out of the gate for such a model, I guess a personal usage tracker could let one decide and then route a monthly amount dividied up to the various creators.

From what you’ve shared, EmanciPay looks interesting and consistent with FairSyndication which is also free to use.

Where I (and I think others) struggle is the behavioral change in which consumers must pay for news online. For certain publishers, I have no doubt it can pay off, but I’m skeptical that this is a long list.

FairSyndication goals are take existing advertising infrastructure to ensure that the original creator gets paid whenever their work is reused commerical. The ad networks get the same amount of money – the reusing site is the only one who takes a “hit”. It’s kind-of like ad-supported micropayments.

btw, I totally agree that the Net is not TV. That thinking will not get us far

You can not copyright news.

Only your wording.

Put up any pay wall you want and I (or anyone else) who reads your content can dissect it, add our own additional information if we want, and regurgitate it out into the web.

If I don’t use your wording you can’t do jack about it. Simple information isn’t copyright-able.

Pay walls aren’t going anywhere. Not even with a cutesy name. Not even for very long with niche information.

I’ve canceled TV at both our houses and only have Internet. All I pay for the Net goes to the cable company. Nothing goes to the “channels.” Not much to complain about there. But not a way to address a need to pay more than $0 for free stuff if I feel like it. To me that’s the challenge.

We’re talking about a new model here. Not leveraging an old one.