Everyone’s talking about creator royalties. Again.

Earlier this week, Magic Eden announced that it would be making artist royalties optional — giving buyers, not artists, the power to determine whether or not they want to pay creator royalties. Almost immediately, Twitter erupted in a frenzy, with two distinct camps emerging on either side of the debate. Interestingly, the main difference in opinion seems to stem from contrasting views on where each side thinks the future of NFTs is headed.

On one side, you have those who agree with Magic Eden’s decision to make royalties optional and to put the decision-making power in the hands of the buyers. Their logic: if market trends have have shifted in this direction, NFT platforms should meet the market and cater to the buyer. Money talks. NFT platforms should listen.

On the other side, you have the pro-royalty camp who has a drastically different vision for the future of the market. Don’t meet the market where it’s at, create the market you want to see. It’s an idealistic stance, for sure, but isn’t the whole promise of Web3 an idealistic one? The point is to create something different than the current system, which already caters to buyers.

It’s definitely an unstable time for NFT platforms. Companies that were used to huge successes are currently experiencing some very real negative effects from the market downturn. To combat this, Magic Eden made the decision to remove creator royalties — a decision that has left many artists and creators feeling betrayed. Their decision confirms what many of us have long suspected, some NFT platforms see speculators as their main audience.

This is a key moment in history for the NFT space. It will separate out those with good intentions that center artists and those whose focus is purely money-making.

I’m proud to be working for a company that’s in the pro-royalty camp. Voice is built for artists and won’t compromise on that.