The influences that each of them receive; what the painter sees, what the writer hears... after all, generates that work in the unconscious mixing pot of his being, in the organization of his mind, which finally executes the tangible and real expression in his art form.

However, the commercial exploitation of this work is another story. There is no doubt that this is an open debate that transcends the limits of art.

It takes us to the field of inventors and patents where, usually, those who were obtaining the patents for the invention were not exactly the first ones to have invented it. We are talking here not about the discernment, morphology, or genesis of a creation, but of the commercial exploitation of that artistic manifestation (yes, inventions are art too).

That is why intellectual property is a fascinating field.

I once heard at one of those “Long-table meetings” and general "opinionology" in the audiovisual industry, the sentence: "The idea belongs to the one who executes it" and, after all, it ended up being true; we all have ideas, but the manifestation of that idea in a commercial product is something different.

The interesting fact is, that for an artist the manifestation of his idea is a visceral need, a drive, the contact between the beyond and what we consider to be the real world.

Perhaps that is why, in general terms, the real artists were, and are, far from these commercial management structures. Their time is spent mainly in the translation and transduction of that idea in the "ether" to the material world.

That is why perhaps, we see repeatedly in history, great artists being bankrupted (Financially speaking) or struggling daily to sustain the structure of a world based on the monetary system that they had to live in... That we had to live in.

It’s is exciting the time we are living in, where it seems that the old paradigm of the monetary system we were born with is starting to crack or at least starting to have a clear alternative based on decentralization.

After all, art is not related to a monetary system at all, but the life of the artist who lives in this world like anyone else, clearly is.

And we need creators, people who, without perhaps thinking about it, are willing to express that visceral need they take from the "ether" which shapes our physical world, so that in the end we will are able to see ourselves reflected in that work, leading us to the reflection of new ideas, to the final thought of who we are and what are we doing here.

Art, in any of its forms, is the connection between these two worlds... and we need, as a key point in the evolution of humanity, these transducers of flesh and blood that reconnect us with our point of origin, perhaps to that "ether".

How can technology disrupt the monetary system that so often alienates the creator from the commercial world?

A technology which directly connects the creator with those who understand the intrinsic and expanded value of that work, and of all artistic manifestations.

I believe that we are entering a crucial stage, perhaps something never before experienced in this society, where creators should only be concerned with expressing their art. Mainly because distribution systems may change with the acquisition of a new decentralized financial system.

When distribution systems change, exploitation systems mutate and transform... and when this happens, we are talking about a new paradigm in the artistic-cultural industries.

And audiovisual art is perhaps the one reaching more directly to that unconscious connection, based on the fast consumption habits and the direct reflection that the stories have in our being when told in this format.

Undoubtedly, it is a very interesting moment where these three big issues: Art, Intellectual Property and Monetary System will go though constant change, experimentation and will play an evolutionary role.

It is a great moment not only to be an artist, but also to acknowledge once and for all that we are all creators. That this role is not only assigned to those who have been able to build a job or a career out of it.

We are all creators.

What a great time to be alive and to see this game of a general awakening. I can't help but feel total gratitude for being a witness to this great part of history.

From the narrative structure to get at feelings and emotions introduced by Greek tragedy to the voracity of the speed of a Tik-tok, stories to a large extent, weave our environment and define in some way our psyche.

A well-told story generates in us the need to belong, the desire to acquire something, the “Fomo”, and it reaches deep into our subconscious where we see this story reflected in our personal experience and our passage through this world.

That's why the great advertisers in the Mad Men era knew so well the human psychology and narrative structures that the Greeks had molded several centuries earlier.

But at the time, the tools required to extrapolate that psychological knowledge with large databases that were updated automatically minute by minute did not exist.

That time is Now.

And that information, that large database, we give and generate second by second with our devices.

Algorithms can predict the possible history, profile, and background we had in our life experience, to fit the story that best reflects our experience.

And since our actions and perceptions are based on the stories we receive and tell, human beings can become, if they are not already, simply hackable.

In the days of advertising, when it was normal to smoke in the office, the strategies, campaigns, and stories were planned by humans, with the data they were able to gather from hand-drawn surveys. There was no internet, no computers.

That is why, when a product had to be expanded and sold at scale (Whether that product could be lethal to a human being or not), heavy artillery was used: The great storytellers of Hollywood.

Phillip Morris, among others, was one of the biggest sponsors for so many Tv shows and movies, making the cigarette an icon, as the movie starts were the main prescribers.

It was a method so effective, that its expansion still lasts to this day. A product wrapped in effective narrative structures always entered the collective unconscious as an ideal, pure, and effective mechanism.

The topic starts to get interesting if we began acknowledging that the databases of customs and habits, preferences, a huge index of classification, sex, age, class, social circle, and a thousand other things, are being managed directly by automatisms with deep learning and artificial intelligence processes.

The stories of the Mad Med advertisers, were developed by writing professionals, creatives, copywriters, and marketing directors always under the indication of serving a client, with a clear purpose: selling a product, creating a brand image, creating a perception, creating a need or a buying habit. Basically, to define a new reality.

But what if the definition of these stories could now be carried out by the same machines that do the calculation of the databases?

What would happen if this artificial intelligence were to develop so well the process of creation of a narrative structure, which would move the recipient in the same way that Mad Men's creatives, writers and film Directors?

What would happen if based on the data analyzed, these machines would choose which story and structure would reach most of the population to influence in one way or another like the cigarette did in Hollywood in the ’40s?

Sorry for the spoiler.

THAT TIME IS NOW.

Since the declarations of states of alarm and global lockdowns, the consumption of streaming platforms skyrocketed in pandemic. It skyrocketed to such an extent that production lines broke down and there was real chaos in programming, intensified in turn by the impossibility of being able to keep shooting new material. The point is that we could only be watching content at home, we couldn't go out... Only a lucky few, like me with a couple of monkeys, who had the only permission the government had given to record in 8K resolution what would later be a film qualified as the only archive for the country's historical memory....

But the interesting fact comes here: At the same time, the intensity and adoption of decentralized finance (DeFi) was exponential and the interest in cryptocurrencies and consequently of blockchain, went through the roof. It deserves a separate article the analysis of all the institutional money that was given to incentivize the economy (with an interest rate at historic lows) and that went directly to crypto actively, either for trading, staking or farming. I remember when more than a decade ago we were talking about that this moment of interest and adoption would come... Events in this beautiful world never cease to surprise you, it would never have occurred to me, not even in the wildest script of my movies that the general interest in cryptocurrencies would be intensified by a global pandemic (among other things) where everyone would be locked in their homes. The point is that there, in 2020, at this moment when many of us zoomed out of our life and transit through this world is when the idea of Film3 came up.

If the Web3 was bringing us a revolution in Defi and at the same time, we were living in real time the need for consumption of stories and audiovisual content .... What would happen if these two concepts came together? If movies, stories in general, instead of being centralized in a streaming platform could incorporate the benefits of Web3?

I have no doubt that we will see an explosion of what we called Film3 at the time with a group of friendly monkeys. And it will be great to see how this concept evolves, mutates, transforms and grows. There is still a long way to go, experimentation, daring, trial and error. And that is the most exciting thing about this crypto community, the continuous, exponential and rapid growth of the concepts, which do not take long to be replicated and put into practice. It is beautiful to see how thoughts and works are shared, branching out and creating new conclusions and adventures.

Well, let's talk conceptually about Film3, which carries a wide range of reflection. Today I will focus only on an introductory aspect.

There are several conjunctural reasons that make this time something completely different from the previous ones in terms of creation, financing and distribution of content.

It's funny how not so many years ago, selling the SVoD window was something completely residual, usually given away or had almost no value. When you went to a market like Berlin (EFM), Cannes and AFM (American Film Market), the 3 big events where most of the deals for the next film productions in the West with worldwide projection are closed, the subscription on demand window did not matter much, at that time, the international sales agent of a film was looking for his film to be released in theaters in as many countries as possible, that ensured royalties to the entire production/distribution chain.

When video-on-demand platforms burst into the market, such as Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Disney, Apple, and dozens of others... this window becomes valuable, and these platforms start the fight for catalogs and intellectual property (IP). This expansion continues and will continue and we will see global deals (HBO, Warner/Discovery for example and many more), for a long time to come, to achieve the much desired funnel of as many subscribers to the platform as possible.

Well, when those platforms start producing, not just broadcasting, that's when a paradigm shift happens.... On the other hand, the big audience starts going less to the movies (not only because it's easier and cheaper to have the catalog at home, only $10 a month) but there are other entertainment competitions that have already eaten a lot of market to the movies, such as video games.

Now, if you were the owner of a platform, would you be interested in licensing your products, that is, having to pay a rent to its creator or being the total owner in perpetuity of that product? The answer is clear.

A new era in the IP war is beginning.

Suddenly, it seems that "everything" from Netflix is "Original", or Amazon or Disney.... "Original "simply means that the platform owns 100% of the IP in perpetuity. ( no matter the platform).

But are these "originals" really originals, are the content creators really on the permanent staff of these companies? Not really.

The reality is that when a creator goes with a brilliant idea to one of these platforms, if it is very brilliant, if the product is too good to say no, if it is so good that it reaches the point of being evaluated among more than 500 projects that want to see the light on a platform that is nothing more than a distribution window to more than 100 countries ... as I say, if it is developed and is very good ... is when they make the offer of "great, we make it original". At that moment, the artist and creator stops being an artist and creator and becomes an employee of the platform to which he/she gives the totality of his/her rights, generally, for the salary of carrying out that production, giving the creation to the platform as a gift.

All this, obviously has many nuances, and there will be different cases and particularities, I am simply exposing the most common case, explained in a simple way, that my producers and creators friends live day by day.

There will also be so-called "development" contracts, but the truth is that in most cases the creator arrives with the product already developed. It is rare for a platform to start a content concept from scratch.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong... hey, the creator is happy, because he will be able to see his work in 190 countries and that, if the work is good, can give him visibility to create other works... (even if the platform ensures that his name as author or director does not appear anywhere). On the other hand, you are receiving a salary for making it (whether writer, director, producer, etc.) with zero risk, since you have a contract that guarantees the budget of the production. It is still a commission, even if the original work was his.

On the other hand, the platform acquires an IP with only the cost of the production, only the cost of carrying it out and swells its catalog in perpetuity.

Apparently, everyone is happy...

The reality is that for the sake of having a work, they have given away an intellectual property that the owner can exploit in perpetuity...none of that real original idea of the artist belongs to him. Let me insist, once again, that this is a generalization and that each case will have its nuances.

Well, but what to do then?

Generally, every paradigm shift, every major breakthrough and change of perspective is accompanied by a major technological change. From the industrial revolution to what happened just a decade ago with SVOD rights, when through streaming we could enjoy a huge catalog of content in real time in our living room and even have premieres and new releases.

Web3, in my humble view, has the same revolutionary power to create a paradigm shift in the creator community.

When the actual creator of that IP, can have access to multiple audiences, multiple possibilities of direct funding through the blockchain, marketing, distribution, buying and selling of that IP, the game can change. When there are more players, the possibility of assigning real value to a product emerges.

It's a very nascent stage.... But it will certainly come.

And this is just the beginning of a reflection... just an initial trigger....

I remember when Netflix , despite being in the market for many years, gained popularity with its new model of own production when it made "House of cards" investing millions in advertising with Kevin Spacey as a poster photo? What will happen when the most recognized people in the entertainment world start adopting other means of non-centralized profitability, with more connection with the public through sharing their value through a decentralized and direct system with the community?

Perhaps, we are witnessing the beginning of a new paradigm, in the same way that Svod's rights were a few years ago? The decentralized distribution of content, the direct access to funding and ownership of content directly by the community itself, the active participation between community and artist for the creation of a content or product... may become the beginning of a new era. Because now, the technology to do so is there. And the technology doesn't ask for permission, it directly disrupts. It's just a matter of adoption. And that's mainly time, among other things.

In the same way that at the time the need to watch "House of Cards" was created, only through a new medium... What will be the "House of Cards" of this new content creation and delivery system?

The debate is served...

Disclaimer: All information gathered are personal reflections of a monkey who lives in the jungle, and who has many monkey friends in the jungle. Let my primate reflections serve to build, debate, think, create and build together, models of thought that help us to evolve. With love, vision of sharing and community. Monkey hug.

Film3 is from my point of view, one of the areas that deserve more attention in this space, because the stories we hear and tell, are the ones that define our actions of existence in this physical world. And that is no small thing. It is worth building it together.