Magic Eden defends launch of NFT royalty enforcement tool

CointelegraphPubblicato 2022-09-15Pubblicato ultima volta 2022-09-15

Introduzione

The launch of Magic Eden’s MetaShield was initially met with mixed reactions from the community.

Solana-based nonfungible token (NFT) marketplace Magic Eden has fended off some community backlash following the launch of MetaShield, its new enforcement tool aimed at deterring NFT buyers who bypass creator royalties. 
MetaShield, which was reportedly launched in partnership with NFT marketplace and aggregator Coral Cube saw mixed reactions from the NFT community following its launch on Sep. 12, who were split on whether NFT marketplaces should protect creator rights or cut royalty fees to make NFTs cheaper for collectors. 
The NFT royalty enforcement tool is designed to allow NFT creators to flag and blur NFTs that may have been sold that managed to bypass creator royalties.
In an eight-part Twitter post on Sept. 14, Magic Eden defended its new tool, noting that some of the “hardest working creators today” are getting “punished” by “custom” royalty marketplaces. 
The new tool came only a few weeks after NFT marketplace X2Y2 introduced a new feature that affords buyers with the discretion to decide whether they pay a royalty fee (and if so, how much) when buying an NFT.
Magic Eden cleared the air in its most recent thread, noting that it launched MetaShield in order to protect creators, rather than tpunish buyers. 
“Most people recognize that zero royalty marketplaces for all creators shouldn’t become the ecosystem norm,” argued Magic Eden.
“What we do is an experiment, collaborate, and ship. MetaShield might not be perfect, but it provides an option to creators in this debate.”
The NFT marketplace also confirmed that they will not be taking control of NFTs and that the royalty enforcement tool will not serve to punish buyers.
6/ Does Magic Eden care about freedom & choice? Yes.

Like collectors, creators should have freedom to defend their biz. Re: decentralization most NFTs are mutable & collectors have purchased them by their choice. We're not centralizing NFTs any more than the original technology.
— Magic Eden (@MagicEden) September 13, 2022
According to Magic Eden, MetaShield was built to allow for creators “to track Solana NFTs listed with custom royalties” and “take action where they see fit” to protect their brand.
According to the Magic Eden website, NFT creators are afforded “Editor” rights to shield the NFT, which allows them to modify the royalty, add a watermark or blur the image. Once debt has been paid, the Editor can revert the NFT back to its original state.
Community reaction
The launch of Magic Eden’s MetaShield was initially met with mixed reactions from the community.
One Twitter user claimed the addition of MetaShield further centralized the Magic Eden NFT marketplace, while another Twitter user said no one will mint NFTs if the creators use MetaShield.
There is no way you haven't seen the discussion regarding your own 2% fees on all volume, and then there is the blurring of the jpegs...

You're the problem not the royalties, bunch of centralised cucks. https://t.co/PyTNrN309v
— Grug (@WiseGrug) September 14, 2022
Another Twitter user said they were concerned that innocent buyers will be punished as they’ll have their newly purchased NFT shielded, stating:
"The biggest concern I have is that this punishes the buyer — someone who might not know they purchased incorrectly. After a certain period of time, the NFT will all of a sudden be 'shielded.' This will lead to an experience where they need to pay a lot more. 
However, many have also praised Magic Eden for “protecting” NFT creators.

Not every NFT marketplace has sided with Magic Eden. “sudoswap” decided not to adopt the royalty fee model to make its NFT platform more buyer-friendly by only subjecting them to standard 2-2.5% platform fees.
In addition to that, Langston Thomas from “nft now” said that even where smart contracts are set in place to pay royalties to creators, it’s ultimately up to the NFT marketplace to honor the royalty agreement.
This is because the NFT marketplace receives the royalty first via the transaction, and is not obligated to pass that royalty on.

Letture associate

Latin America's Payments Landscape Is Not What You Think It Is

This report challenges common misconceptions about Latin America's payment landscape, based on over 500 hours of firsthand research. Key findings include: 1) Crypto card transaction volume primarily comes from high-net-worth individuals receiving USDT salaries, not retail spending. 2) QR code payments (e.g., Brazil's Pix, Argentina's Mercado Pago) are the dominant payment method across most emerging markets, not cards. 3) A major untapped opportunity lies in enabling cross-border interoperability between domestic instant payment systems. 4) Payment competition is shifting from customer acquisition to owning the settlement layer (e.g., acquiring banks). 5) Latin America is not a single market; Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, and smaller "forgotten five" countries (e.g., Guatemala, Honduras) have vastly different dynamics. 6) Stablecoin-to-fiat conversion margins are collapsing toward zero, pushing companies to build value-added services on top. 7) Future payment winners will be multi-country brands, not single-corridor specialists. 8) Marketing must target specific user segments (e.g., digital nomads, unbanked immigrants) with tailored messaging, not a generic "Brazilian" audience. 9) Contrary to perception, Latin American regulators are often ahead of the US in creating frameworks for digital assets and instant payments, with clear licensing deadlines. The core takeaway is that the region's payment rules are being rewritten, moving beyond cards and stablecoin arbitrage towards integrated, cross-border QR-based solutions.

链捕手12 min fa

Latin America's Payments Landscape Is Not What You Think It Is

链捕手12 min fa

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

Vitalik Buterin's recent algorithmic stablecoin proposal envisions using an option-like mechanism to create a stablecoin without the liquidation risks inherent in traditional collateralized debt position (CDP) models. The design splits one unit of ETH into two components: a 'stable' leg (P) that maintains value up to a certain strike price, and an 'upside' leg (N) that captures any appreciation above that price. Together, they always sum to one ETH, eliminating the need for debt or liquidation mechanisms. From an options perspective, the stable leg essentially functions as a synthetic, covered call position. However, significant challenges exist. For the stable asset to maintain its peg, it must continuously roll deep in-the-money call options, leading to potential rollover slippage, predictable trading paths vulnerable to front-running, and liquidity issues. Crucially, the system's scalability depends on a constant demand for the upside leg—a form of leveraged ETH long position without funding rates or liquidation risk. It's unclear if such persistent, specific demand will materialize from speculators or market makers who have simpler alternatives like perpetual swaps. The author, drawing from experience with Rysk, argues that DeFi options have struggled as standalone trading products due to complexity and fragmented liquidity. Their potential lies instead as foundational infrastructure underpinning more complex financial primitives like stablecoins, structured yields, or index products—transforming from a direct product into a core pricing and risk distribution engine for the next generation of on-chain finance.

marsbit1 h fa

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片