whaley
Somewhat Sellaband addicted
Posts: 265
|
Post by whaley on Feb 28, 2010 13:08:54 GMT
To me what Li says here sounds very sane. I hope that Sellaband can soon answer my mail with similar resolutions.
|
|
|
Post by Lucretia on Feb 28, 2010 13:31:50 GMT
3. On the financial (and/or banking) regulations the issue is more complex. Most likely the position that the legal advisor of the new Owners has taken, is that the believers buy a Part and do not pre-buy an Album. It means that the German 2 weeks right to withdraw the transaction/sale is applicable. This is, however, an interpretation of the Sellaband business model. Another interpretation that the old Sellaband AG had is equally valid. A believer pre-buys an album, ergo does not get the album within 2 weeks. To ensure that the pre-payment stays secure, it is deposited in an escrow. If the pre-buying does not result in an album within a reasonable timeframe, in the old Sellaband model this would have been reaching the set budget ($ 50'000), the pre-payment in escrow can be paid back on request. If it is now considered the case that believers are buying a part, rather than pre-purchasing an album, then this surely brings even more confusion to the terms and conditions that we are being asked to either agree or disagree with. Within those terms, Sellaband states that it only acts as the facilitator between artist and believer (this is also stated in the definition of parties to the agreement), yet artists do not sell parts - Sellaband does. I would therefore consider this statement of facilitator a mis-representation. The actual situation would then be that believers buy parts in Sellaband with that money to be held in trust where the parties involved in that trust agreement are then considered Sellaband and the artist. (once the 2 week cooling off period for the believer has passed). Sellaband is clearly not a facilitator in this case - there must be two agreements one between the believer and Sellaband and another between the artist and Sellaband. And this in turn would invalidate section 9.3 in the believer T&C (and similar paragraphs in the other T&C documentation) It's clear that clarification of this point raised by Li is therefore something which needs to be made and fast
|
|
li
Sellaband addict in waiting
Posts: 35
|
Post by li on Feb 28, 2010 14:21:56 GMT
mawa : so if you already thought so, why didn't you say so? ;-) I like your analogy with the Mafia Wars on FB. I hate these games but I can understand how men love to get rid of some excess energy with playing these games. It's a great business model though, one that makes FB rich and allows me to stay on FB for free ;-)
|
|
li
Sellaband addict in waiting
Posts: 35
|
Post by li on Feb 28, 2010 14:48:44 GMT
LucretiaI didn't translate his full eMail on the new T&Cs vs the old ones and he pointed out a.o. article 9.3 as well as the definition of "Parts: A declaration of faith in the Artist". He said that based on the explanation of Dagmar, he concluded that the lawyer considered the buying a Part vs pre-buying a yet to be made album, applicable in this case. I don't think that it necessarily is in conflict with article 9.3, if the Part (which you can shift among artists) is a kind of certificate of deposit of the payment for this part held for you in escrow, quasi a statement that your Part is good for the money it represents. But indeed, the issue you raise was also valid during the Sellaband AG reign, only their legal advisors concluded that it was considered pre-buying, where the critical issue would be (and probably still is) the shifting of parts between artists. First you pre-buy an album in artist X, then you withdraw your pre-buy and instead have it paid out or pre-buy in an album of artist Y. All the while your money is in escrow until you ask for pay-out. As far as I understand it is this pay-out that is now the issue. Which means that somehow the money that is in Escrow means that it is not your Intention of Faith in an Artist, but a final transaction between you and the artists on SAB. In fact it says that Sellaband testifies by giving you a Part, that this Part is covered in full, so the Artist can trust that this part is worth its money ;-). In this case SAB functions as facilitator and not as Parts seller. To me it sounds terribly like semantics, but then, most legal situations feel like this ;-) I did not ask a German lawyer but a Dutch one. According to him there are some differences between German and Dutch Banking legislations, so he was lining out which interpretations could apply to say that a grace period of 2 weeks would be allowed only. BTW, I found the explanations of the new CEO even more confusing ;-), but I'm not sure if I want to go back to my lawyer with the statements made on Talentcast. I'm quite sure that at times he didn't find the English words to convey what he would've answered in German.
|
|
thor
Sellaband addict in waiting
Posts: 42
|
Post by thor on Feb 28, 2010 15:38:05 GMT
Yes, it looks like the new business model interpretation is that Sellaband is selling some toy money called parts to the believers. With these parts, they can play around and invest them in artists. At the same time they offer the artists who collected a certain amount of these parts the option to record a CD.
Somehow, it's kind of a return to the very old previous business model. I remember JohanV saying in an interview: Sellaband's business is selling parts ;D
|
|
|
Post by mawa on Feb 28, 2010 16:16:02 GMT
Yup, indeed. Which all gives indeed more parallels to models like the internal currency of Online Games like WoW. Actually my son, when he was not even 16, made quite a bit of money by selling one of his accounts on the free Online game Metin2 on ebay...something which was of course forbidden by the rules of that game - but it actually does not seem to be forbidden in the new Sellaband T&C In general, I think it becomes time for all the people of my age to put some notes in our testaments, of what should happen to all our various online accounts in case the Online God calls us to him
|
|
kompis
Sellaband addict in waiting
Posts: 15
|
Post by kompis on Feb 28, 2010 17:04:36 GMT
Besides all the legal considerations there is (for me) a more (let me say) social (maybe ethical) point of view. If SAB GmbH really wanted to not include the 2 weeks period in T&Cs they surely could have found a way to do so. Ask two lawyers and get three opinions. The field of law (crowdfunding) is quite new (no/limited case-law) so I think you can get always a lawyer who will support your (legal) point of view.
|
|
kompis
Sellaband addict in waiting
Posts: 15
|
Post by kompis on Feb 28, 2010 17:07:19 GMT
mawaJust thinking about a new business model: Digital Ascension I know I'm a blasphemer.
|
|
|
Post by grooveduke on Feb 28, 2010 17:54:01 GMT
mawa et al. that does look like what the model is moving towards. Online virtual money. With other successful models out there, maybe it could be a good hook....?
|
|
|
Post by mawa on Feb 28, 2010 18:11:22 GMT
Well Grooveduke,
with what we know so far: - the bankcrupsy and all the direct and collateral damage it has caused and will cause in the future - participating cost in this 'online virtual money' closing in on 30% - the complete and utterly risk of artists dropouts or subsequent delivery failure on the 'believers' side of things with nothing in place which could be seen as an insurrance .... Well, as far as I am concerned, the likelyhood of me becomeing a Jehovah Witness and donating them all my money is already higher....
|
|
thor
Sellaband addict in waiting
Posts: 42
|
Post by thor on Feb 28, 2010 18:50:19 GMT
Especially now that a lot of artists are leaving or getting farther away from the goal instead of closer to it, and with everything being uncertain, it's not a good idea not to have the possibility to remove the money any more.
|
|
|
Post by grooveduke on Feb 28, 2010 21:13:11 GMT
mawa LOL. I am divested as much as I am going to be at this point. Payout seems to work. That's a big plus for the new team. It had obviously been disabled in anticipation of a run. They could have stuck to the "temporarily broken" story but they fixed it instead. Good for them. They are definitely gonna be starting from scratch. It sounds like most of what they wanted was the back end and the micro-payment processing. Or maybe I'm reading too much into the new CEO's comments. I think they should change the name. They'll need to start recruiting new believers, and I'm trying to picture what the profile of those believers will be. That's why I'd really love to know what they plan for the future. I want to see how this story ends.
|
|
|
Post by wyando on Feb 28, 2010 21:28:17 GMT
Hmmm... virtual money? This bankruptcy seems not be touching our real money so far, because of the escrow account. But if we "just" have some virtual money now, which can lead to some (good pieces of) CDs and other incentives, will this virtual money be save on a possible next bankruptcy (<i>what happened once, can happen twice</i>)? Will say, is virtual money treated legally the same as real money?
|
|
|
Post by mawa on Feb 28, 2010 21:29:13 GMT
..so we all I guess...
amen .. for now.
|
|
|
Post by firlefranz on Mar 1, 2010 9:39:14 GMT
Hi everyone,
i´ve started a new thread titled "Questions & Answers T&Cs" where you can find informations on this matter.
Thank you and a good start into the new week, Franz
|
|