Kickstarter. Its like "piracy" running backwards.
They mostly already do have this sort of thing in all of their contracts. They try to make everything "work for hire" in which the artist retains zero rights to his/her own work. Prince couldn't even keep calling himself Prince without a legal fight to the death.
The more worrying possibility is that a certain type of busybody who can't/doesn't create anything says to himself "People shouldn't just be able to succeed like this! There should be laws! Why wasn't I consulted?!" in not so many words and goes about trying to remedy this perceived failure.
1) Tax/Licence fee. Look at Germany taxing Google News et al for the News collection societies.
2) Put pressure on the financial areas they're allowing money. There's a reason why KickStarter isn't adopting PayPal.
3) Negative media campaign highlighting fraudulent abuses of trusting users.
Uh-oh is right. This is the sort of thing that Scott McCloud wanted to bring about with micropayments -- a more direct connection between artists and their fans.
According to the "Economics of Anime" post, it should be possible now for people to revive gone but beloved shows in that medium on Kickstarter. New episode of Firefly, anyone?
Doing something like that would be as important as Louis CK's video. It would be another step towards the fall of the media status quo.
That IP is owned by Fox isn't it? Surely Fox would notice the large amount of cash on the table and demand a large percentage cut of it.
I think this model only works for well-known creators making new work. So Joss Whedon could make something new by using his popularity to raise funds...
(Edit: not to ignore the unknown people out there using kickstarter to make work. They're a workable model too)
I suspect its far better for an exec at a company like Fox to simply prevent anyone from ever using a property again than to be seen as even a tiny bit giving it away when more could have been charged.
There are ways to address this. For one thing, you don't have to tell them you're going to Kickstarter it. (You'll need other initial backers in this case, though.) For another thing, you can set out the expenses ahead of time and promise the actors the overage as a "promotional bonus." This lets the exec save face and it motivates the actors to promote the project.
If anything causes a problem for him, it will be trying to keep the comic updated while shipping out all this stuff out to people. If he has any weakness, it's keeping a regular update schedule.
In the US we already live in an increasingly padded walls nanny state. Personally I've had enough of it. Forbid we be daring and reach for the stars again, and take on the risk that goes with it.
NB: I am not an American myself, and glad of it.
NB2: Not that I think the GP's suggestion makes sense in THIS case, because we know that Rich Burlew can ship product, because he's already shipped all this product.
Regulation does not inherently = smart or good.
You know what isn't regulated? How stupid the Fed gets to be with our dollar. How careless they get to be with interest rates and QE programs.
The lesson we apparently didn't spend the last five years learning, is what happens when the Fed intervenes (2001 / 2002) with a massive liquidity pump to falsify a recovery and artificially avoid a worse recession for political points. Oh hey, what does that remind you of?
The chaos of 2008/09 was almost exclusively derived out of trillions in bad real estate bets, which took down other bets when they began to fold in 2006 and 2007.
It was the Fed that spurred the gambling with their crazy rate policies; the government threw gasoline on the fire with bad legislation. The Fed has admitted it has the ability to generate bubbles through rate policy mistakes; and a bubble is exactly what they created. If you inflate a $10 trillion real estate bubble, when it crashes it's going to wipe out your financial system.
Then it was the Fed that bailed out all the institutions they were previously dealing financial smack to. A trillion for Citi, a trillion for Bank of America, a trillion for Fannie/Freddie, and so on. During the recession post 9/11, the Fed 'encouraged' the banks to lend with the spigots wide open, and encouraged hyper risk with low rates.
2007/08 was a sugar crash, the Fed supplied the sugar. They're doing it all over again right now, and nobody gives a shit.
I feel though, that when you want to raise 58k and suddenly you have 1.2m on your hands, it might not even be what you desired in the first place. More often than not, the expectations rise quite a bit when the money you receive 20folds.
In case that will indeed turn out to be an issue (we will see soon enough), I think it might be sensitive to include a default setting in Kickstarter saying: "Maximum amount that can be risen: 5x the desired funding". People could still set that cap to whatever they desire, but they would have to think about it first.
Obviously, I do not know anything personally about how those guys felt raising that much, but this would be my own point of view and I think such a setting could not cause any harm...
IE: You need to spend possibly years and years building your brand before you can expect any type of money like this. Everyone cites Louis CK as a way to raising tons of money online directly from fans, but a huge part of this is having fans in the first place. Isn't the hardest part of all of this struggling along for possibly years as just another small artist online trying to pay your bills before you make it big?
...or were pre-orders for the books (through the reward system) so dominant that
you’re in the same model, just on a larger scale?
RB: Definitely the latter.