The result is a dynamic in which platforms exercise near-autocratic control over the creators that frequent their platforms. YouTube can demonetize high-profile creators at will. TikTok can ban its biggest stars indefinitely. Apple determines who gets to live in its App Store, and OnlyFans can dictate the morality of their creators to appease their... See more
The prevailing standard is a 30% platform cut, which is accompanied by another 30% Apple Store / Google Play tax if purchases are made in app. This has led to the new wave of standalone utilities such as Kofi, micro-tipping services offering more favorable revenue sharing terms for creators. The most recent features from big platforms s... See more
Here is what I believe the App Store has fundamentally wrong: its current organizing principle is digital versus analog; anything that is digital has to have in-app purchase, while anything that is analog — i.e. connected to the real world — can monetize however it pleases. That is why Amazon or Uber can ask for your credit card, and Airbnb can do ... See more
This made me think of the other recent case against Apple from Epic, where Apple's response to the court was essentially trolling. The judgement required Apple to allow apps to advertise outside marketplaces where users could purchase in-game items. So apple responded by allowing developers to apply to place exactly one text-only (non-hyperlink), s... See more
While creators and developers ultimately require true ownership in the platforms on which they rely to make a living, we also hold that, in today’s world, the frictionless flow of money from audiences to creators is table stakes for any sort of meaningful adoption and success, and it is
Creators are questioning the terms that govern their relationship with the platforms they frequent—and the right of the platforms to set those terms in the first place. How the ecosystem responds—what alternatives are proposed, who builds them, and how—will shape the next phase of the Creator Economy.