Magic Eden defends launch of NFT royalty enforcement tool

CointelegraphPublicado em 2022-09-15Última atualização em 2022-09-15

Resumo

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.

Leituras Relacionadas

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.

marsbitHá 10m

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

marsbitHá 10m

SpaceX, AI, and XRP: Why the Next Wealth Transfer Might Be Different?

The article posits that the global economy is transitioning into a new phase of infrastructure investment. Capital, facing slowing traditional growth engines, is flowing towards emerging foundational systems. This includes space infrastructure (exemplified by SpaceX), AI computing power, satellite networks, data centers, and global payment systems. A key driver is a potential new commodity supercycle fueled by industrial demand from these sectors. Concurrently, the role of blockchain is evolving from speculative assets to a critical settlement layer for the future economy. Digital assets like XRP and XLM, focused on payments and interoperability, are highlighted as potential rails for cross-border settlement, tokenized assets, and machine-to-machine (AI Agent) transactions. The narrative connects figures like Ripple's Jed McCaleb to space ventures, suggesting convergence. The argument emphasizes a shift from speculative narratives to utility-driven value. As AI and space commerce generate new economic activity, and regulatory clarity improves, blockchain networks may underpin real-time value transfer. The conclusion urges investors to consider which networks will form the backbone of this integrated next-generation economic infrastructure.

marsbitHá 1h

SpaceX, AI, and XRP: Why the Next Wealth Transfer Might Be Different?

marsbitHá 1h

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbitHá 2h

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbitHá 2h

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbitHá 3h

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbitHá 3h

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbitHá 3h