[sickcodebruh]

For some context, it’s important to understand the degree to which Bandcamp’s success and ubiquity with independent music is built on a people-first, anti-corporate culture. Bandcamp is an obsession for a very large and engaged segment of the independent music world. A good friend, a professional musician, told me “I feel like I’m watching my childhood home burn to the ground.” This is far from a unique sentiment. People are mourning. I’m building an alternative[0] to Bandcamp, announced the day after Epic’s sale, and I am receiving a disruptive volume of messages from people looking to sign up and get involved in response to this. It’s not just users, it’s bands and labels and people who’ve contributed to Bandcamp over the years. Many of these are people with large voices and followings and businesses of their own.

This has been building for some time. The Epic sale set it in motion. The formation of the union was a signal to supporters that the staff distrusted the new owners and were taking steps to protect the company’s mission. The Songtradr sale escalated it. The perception of targeting union members is being interpreted as confirmation of all fears.

So while the tech industry has dealt with high-profile layoffs for the past year, I don’t think most if any of those companies have the cultural significance of Bandcamp or have a for-the-people ethos baked into their DNA. This is much more significant than layoffs after an acquisition. The perception of targeting union members could do irreparable harm to a brand built on honesty, support, and integrity.

[0] - https://ampwall.com

[basisword]

This just feels like an ad. Bandcamp hasn't changed one bit since the sale to Epic. 99% of users don't know anything about Bandcamp's operations let alone that the staff planned to unionise. Bandcamp has been around for a long time. People have libraries. Artists have their entire discogs on it. Niether of those camps are moving unless something fundamentally changes to force their hand - which hasn't happened yet.

[sickcodebruh]

I most definitely do not intend for it to feel like an ad so I apologize if that's how it comes off. I chimed in with my perspective because a lot of the replies were looking at this news from the lens of "layoffs in tech" and I want to offer context as someone tangentially connected. I mentioned my involvement as a way of demonstrating my relationship to the situation and, sure, as a disclaimer in case someone wants to write me off.

You are correct in that most people do not know anything about what's happening. But Bandcamp is largely a platform that courts super-fans and a sizable portion of this people are keyed into independent music, with all its happenings and drama. This is especially true for the successful bands, labels, and journalists who use their platform. So while 99% of their users might have no idea, the 1% that does contains many people who are heavily involved in making and influencing independent music. We see visible evidence of this in the number of music news sites that are posting updates on the situation. And I see evidence through the volume and intensity of feedback I'm receiving.

[cbreezyyall]

Is that contact form the best way to get in touch with you about getting involved?As a programmer and amateur DJ it breaks my heart to see the best website for buying tracks go down in flames.

[sickcodebruh]

Email is best! Inbounds are getting kind of wild so we just setup [e-mail] so I'm not a bottleneck. You can also do [e-mail] but I'm monitoring the shared box. The form on the page adds you to the mailing list, which I'm trying to delay using because I loathe newsletter spam.

[sspiff]

I was wondering why noone had started a bandcamp alternative as I read this article. Bandcamp isn't a complicated product. It's the people and content that define its value.

If trust and goodwill are eroded, then the platform loses its value.

Glad to see an independent initiative in this space.

[JohnFen]

> It's the people and content that define its value.

That's exactly what makes developing a replacement difficult. It's not the software. I'm sure that a very large majority of people here could write that in a reasonable amount of time.

But the software isn't really the main value that Bandcamp provides. For a service to replace Bandcamp, it needs to be trustworthy and have a track record of doing right by both artists (and mostly small indie artists) and audiences. That takes time.

[sspiff]

That's my point though, bandcamp is alienating the people that give it its place in the music business, and creating an opening for competitors.

Saying bandcamp isn't complicated isn't the same as saying it's easy to replace. I'm just saying it's feasible to try with a small team and small amount of capital.

[IBCNU]

As someone who has been lucky to work on some large-scale apps that are household names with very very small teams, I find it fascinating/hilarious that comments from the Y Combinator peanut gallery often reduce acquired companies to 'isn't a complicated product, let's just rebuild over a weekend.'

While the core technology may not be as 'complicated' as quantum computing, the unique challenges in execution, user engagement, and market fit should not be underestimated, simple is hard ya'll... The real value and are far from trivial to replicate and come from the people.... no offense just sayin' this is a funny pattern around here.

[JohnFen]

There's a strong tendency for devs to underestimate how long it takes to develop software. My hypothesis is because devs tend to focus on the core functionality and are really estimating how long it would take to do that. But in most projects, that's only about 20% of the work required.

I'm also reminded of the old saying that "nothing is impossible for the person who doesn't have to do it."

[internetsamurai]

There are quite a few alternatives - Resonate, focused on streaming (https://resonate.coop/) and Formaviva, focused on independent electronic music (https://formaviva.com/)

[DHPersonal]

Rob Dougan (you'd know him from The Matrix soundtrack) started selling his music on Gumroad a while ago. https://robdougan.gumroad.com/

[whyoh]

IndieHD (https://indiehd.com/) has been around for almost as long as Bandcamp.

[yoyohello13]

Someone makes something awesome that people love, it gets bought by a giant company, the giant company extracts as much value as possible and discards the corpse, someone makes an awesome new version. This is the software lifecycle.

[plussed_reader]

So why am I still using and recommending VLC? Because it doesn't have to be that way.

In before the true scotsman of software lifecycles.

[yoyohello13]

VLC is developed by a non-profit (as far as I'm aware). I'm kind of interested in what the world would be like if all companies were non-profit.

[ToucanLoucan]

I mean Google started as a non-profit and basically defined the search engine and it's tools. Then it went private, continued briefly, and has slid more and more into yet another corporate rent-seeker ever since.

I don't even think it's necessarily profit vs. non-profit, I think it's private vs. shareholder ownership. Once the shareholder brain-worms take root, a company will set itself on fire to maintain the illusion of quarterly growth, because anything else is failure. Even if you somehow managed to dominate a market to complete exclusion of meaningful competitors, if you fail to grow, you are failing. That is fucking absurd. A company reaching a natural plateau of steady customers generating excellent profits is, by Wall Street's definition, a failed business. I'm reminded of Greta Thunberg's notion of "the fantasy of infinite growth."

For-profit entities certainly can do some sketchy things to ensure profitability, and that warrants skepticism. But you really only see the truly brain dead nonsense decisions from publicly traded corporations. Shit like laying off 2/3 of your staff because you had a less profitable period (not not-profitable, _less_ profitable!).

[JumpCrisscross]

> if you somehow managed to dominate a market to complete exclusion of meaningful competitors, if you fail to grow, you are failing

This is a trope in Silicon Valley, but it's simply not true. Most companies in a developed economy aim for a stable state, i.e. close to zero real growth with payments made to investors via sole proprietorship pay-outs, dividends and/or debt.

Now a growth company is worth more than a stable-state one, ceteris paribus, so there are incentives to promise it. If your promise growth and fail to grow, you are failing. That doesn't mean the company is failing. It's just mismanaged and likely misrepresented by its capital structure.

[ToucanLoucan]

I mean, fair point. But name a corporation that's publicly traded right now that isn't promising growth to shareholders? If they're all doing it, that's the status quo, irrespective of if they should be or not.

FFS, Amazon promises growth. Amazon! A company so formidable that even it announcing it's thinking about entering a market causes a small stock blip to any major companies in that market, because it's presumed they will fucking obliterate them.

[cbsmith]

> I mean Google started as a non-profit and basically defined the search engine and it's tools. Then it went private, continued briefly, and has slid more and more into yet another corporate rent-seeker ever since.

Wait, when was Google a non-profit?

[ToucanLoucan]

Started as a research grant-based program at Stanford in 1995. Three years later it became a company after building the basic product to a launch-ready state.

[remedan]

I think the author of VLC has shared the fact that they keep receiving offers to buy the project for some significant sums of money. They refuse to sell on principle.

It is difficult to prevent enshittification when it requires people to refuse to get rich. Most aren't willing to stick to their principles in the face of that.

[mindslight]

Because OP isn't actually describing the software lifecycle, but rather the business or services lifecycle. Our society is so steeped in the business imperative of creating ongoing reliance on services, often with such relationships being marketed as "software", that the two are commonly conflated.

[g-b-r]

The difference here is that the owners had always signaled to not want to do it

[mardifoufs]

Stupid question: why weren't the employees unionized before epic took over? From what I'm reading it seems like it would've been easy considering the corporate culture it had. I know, hindsight and all, but I guess my point is that I'm wondering if Epic did something that led to unionizing. It sucks since it looks like bandcamp was doing pretty ok and didn't need to be sold around.

[diggan]

I guess many saw it as a stable business that wasn't trying to "expand and grow above all else", so they felt relatively safe. As soon as it got sold, the perceived safety went away, so they started organizing so they could start to feel safe again.

[runarberg]

I think this is a good question. I’m guessing it might just be a circumstance of being located in California (as opposed to e.g. the UK) where unionization of tech workers is very rare. And that there simply wasn’t a push to start unionization efforts until after the Epic takeover. I also suspect that the unionization wave which is taking over the USA just didn’t start soon enough to start union efforts before the takeover.

[JumpCrisscross]

> the unionization wave which is taking over the USA

Union membership fell to an all-time low in 2022 [1]. Given Yellow's bankruptcy and the writer lay-offs, I'd expect that to have continued this year.

[1] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf

[runarberg]

The wave of unionization refers to new unions being formed, more workplaces unionizing, and a general zeitgeist favoring union. It does not refer to total number of union members.

Since the 1980s the trend has been that unions, unionized workplaces, and union memberships have all been on a steep decline (along with pay, worker rights, etc.). It is not surprising that union memberships will continue to decline given the previous trend, but also the confounding variables of union member being more likely to be close to retirement age, rate of unemployment, gig workers, contractors, etc.

However, this trend is starting to reverse. There have been several high profile workplaces unionizing, several high profile unionizing efforts, and a general positive reaction among the working public. Notable also—and very much a part of this wave—are several high profile strikes, near strikes and other direct action. UPS narrowly avoided a strike, UAW are striking, screenwrites had one of their longest strikes, actors are in one of their longest strikes. Amazon has seen walkouts, etc.

This is very much a wave, even though one particular line does not reflect it.

[JumpCrisscross]

> wave of unionization refers to new unions being formed, more workplaces unionizing, and a general zeitgeist favoring union

Public opinions is high and rising [1] and election petitions are up [2]. But job growth is accelerating towards non-union sectors with no sign of the unions following [3].

It's a plateau, not a wave. Unions are diminishing. But where they exist, they're expressing themselves more forcefully. The conditions for a wave exist. But a combination of labor law restrictions on unions and disinterest among nonunion workers fundamentally limits reversal.

[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/398303/approval-labor-unions-hi...

[2] https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/election-petit...

[3] https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2023/02/28/1159663461/you...

[bryans]

If you want to build trust in this industry, I think you'll need to do better than cloning an existing product and slapping a "for the people" label on it. Content creators of all types are exhausted by the endless nickel and diming, so at this point, transparency is going to be the only way to attract a mass audience.

When everyone knows hosting costs equate to a fraction of a penny per sale, you'll need to strongly justify that 5% fee. You'll need to pay ~3.5% in PRO fees just to have public playback on the site -- even if there's not a single cover song among the uploaded albums -- so let both the artist and fan know where that money is going and why.

A huge problem with the "pay what you want" model is that the host and PRO still get to middleman what is fundamentally a tip from the fan. Find a way to implement a secondary form for tips that go straight to an account the artist owns, without making the purchase form more complicated, and you'll have an attractive and unique feature.

However, Fourthwall already has a polished version of your product roadmap and charges less for it, albeit without the music-specific theming, and even Patreon recently implemented direct digital sales. You're facing an uphill battle against entrenched and VC-backed products.

[g-b-r]

If you succeed in making it a Bandcamp alternative please make the tos and privacy terms extremely brief and transparent, for me (and I imagine many other privacy-minded people) that's one of the most important factors in deciding to try and trust a service these days

[sickcodebruh]

This is important to me. It should matter to everyone, especially in the independent music/arts where value so easily gets leeched out by people with resources.

[g-b-r]

Thank you, I agree

[wnevets]

> For some context, it’s important to understand the degree to which Bandcamp’s success and ubiquity with independent music is built on a people-first, anti-corporate culture.

That is why I'm wondering if the new owner doesn't care about what makes basecamp work and just wants to use all of basecamp data for its "AI" business. Otherwise you're left with another owner who doesn't understand what they bought.

https://www.songtradr.com/blog/posts/ai-metadata-better-sear...

[diggan]

> just wants to use all of basecamp data for its "AI" business

Which data specifically? The music itself belongs to the artists and labels, which leaves us with the user activity data, but that must be acquirable much cheaper with larger amount of data elsewhere. Also the data would be tailored to indie/electronic music, rather than applicable to pop music, so the usefulness of even user activity data seems kind of low.

[wnevets]

> The music itself belongs to the artists and labels,

As if not owning the data has stopped AI companies in the past.

[diggan]

Exactly! So why would a AI company who want the music itself bother themselves with buying the company first? Just scrape it like everyone else.

[wnevets]

If you have the kind of cash to throw at a bandcamp purchase its probably easier/faster to buy it than downloading and scaping every album.

Otherwise the new owner doesn't get bandcamp and why so many of its customers like it.

[ethanjstark]

> another owner who doesn't understand what they bought.

I couldn't imagine who you might be referring to! /snark

[throwaway290]

It was building up since the original team sold to Epic. Can't trust after that.

What is the difference of your service with eg. Deezer? Someone in another thread mentioned it offers lossless DRM-free downloads these days.

[sickcodebruh]

I can't speak about Deezer specifically since I'm not familiar with their product, only their name. There's a little FAQ up at https://ampwall.com/faq-alpha that might answer many of your questions, I'd prefer not to go full Pitch Mode on HN. But in short: artist-owned and operated -- I am the first user and have skin in the game that goes beyond money, incorporated as a Public Benefit Company, with a distinct vision that is more inclusive of music culture beyonds just bands and labels. It'll take time for the vision to be realized but we're on the right track. Happy to answer any other questions through email if you'd like, [e-mail] or [e-mail].

[bloopernova]

I wish you every success with this, I'm really glad there are people that still care.

In case anyone else was curious about Public Benefit Corporations, or PBCs, I found this comparing them with a B Corp: https://socapglobal.com/2021/04/whats-the-difference-between...

[trinsic2]

Thanks for being a part of this. I have been a supporter of Bandcamp since I found it a few years ago. I would donate some money to keep a site like this going that works directly for musicians and provides non-drm digital files., streaming was a nice bonus too. Can't believe this bullshit.. really sad right now :(

[BowBun]

As a previous fan of Deezer, it's just another streaming platform. They do have high-quality streaming, but at the end of the day they'll squeeze stream monetization as much as possible, and you still don't own the music. We need a transparent, fair marketplace for musicians to sell their work that doesn't behold them to streaming providers + publishers.

[dimal]

Thank you for making this a public benefit company. We need more companies to follow this route to protect against future enshittification. But with public benefit corporations, I’ve been wondering, is it possible at some point for the board vote to change to some other type of entity, like a C-corp? And what rules are in place to enforce that it is working in the public benefit?

Cory Doctorow talks about using Ulysses pacts like this to protect against future bad behavior, but I’m wondering, what is the strength of the pact?

[sickcodebruh]

My understanding of it (and IANAL) is that while the board could potentially vote to change it, the shareholders can take legal action for failing to pursue the public benefit obligations. I can't say whether trying to remove the public benefit obligation alone is grounds to bring a suit, but I think they'd be able to make a case for it. My hope is that being a PBC will scare off predators and encourage like-minded people from day 1, leading us to a point where a future board is made up of people who are 100% committed to the mission from the start.

That's a long way of saying what you said: I want it to protect against future enshittification. I want it to work.

[dimal]

Thanks for the answer. Yeah, hopefully if there are enough disincentives, that can protect you. This is all uncharted territory, though. Kudos for trying it out.

[peyton]

Nonissue once you’re big enough to have a legal dept to deal with shit like that.

[rgrieselhuber]

Glad to hear someone is working on this.

[Dah00n]

Sounds good, but since it is not EU based, my band and I will have to stay put. Good luck though. Competition is a good thing.

[happytiger]

Bandcamp wants EU based either they came from Oakland, CA. So what’s the objection?

[Dah00n]

I don't use Bandcamp.

[sbarre]

I'm not affiliated with Ampwall (or even American) but I'm curious what the objection is here?

[diggan]

(Usually) Better/more stable working conditions for workers in Europe compared to the US. Band could also just be based in EU and prefer the user-protections EU offers compared to the US.

[creshal]

Bandcamp was/is American too, though. Bandcamp was fine, but this isn't?

[diggan]

I guess maybe you learn from your mistakes? I'm not GP that said I wouldn't use ampwall, so I'm just guessing what the reasoning could be.