|
on Cultural Economics |
|
Issue of 2026–02–16
five papers chosen by Roberto Zanola, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale |
| By: | Sasha Stoikov; Aadityaa Singla; Umu Cetin; Luis Alonso Cendra Villalobos |
| Abstract: | In the streaming era, music revenues distributed to rights holders have become more transparent. However, it is not yet clear how to quantify the risk and return characteristics of music royalty assets, as is done with equities. In this paper, we fit three discounted cashflow models to transactions on the Royalty Exchange platform. We use our best model to backtest the one year and five year performance of music royalty assets, after transaction costs. We find that Life of Rights (LOR) music assets had risk and return characteristics comparable to stocks in the S\&P500, when held over 5 years. Since the performance of stocks and music assets are likely to be uncorrelated, this result may help investors assess this asset class within the context of a more traditional stock and bond portfolio. |
| Date: | 2026–02 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2602.05007 |
| By: | Imke Reimers; Joel Waldfogel |
| Abstract: | With the diffusion of LLMs between 2022 and 2025, new book releases have tripled, raising a question of AI's impact on book quality. We develop a ratings-based usage measure that is comparable across book release vintages, and we find that the vintages from the AI influx period have lower average quality. Yet, the top 1, 000 monthly releases per category - albeit not the top 100 - have higher quality than before; and the effect is larger in categories with faster growth in new titles. Authors entering since the LLM influx produce predominantly low-quality work; and the higher-quality output of pre-LLM authors entrants has risen. A nested logit calibration shows that LLM-enhanced book production could, in steady state, raise the surplus that consumers derive from book markets by a quarter to a half. |
| JEL: | L16 L82 |
| Date: | 2026–01 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:34777 |
| By: | Samiha Tariq |
| Abstract: | Do online narratives leave a measurable imprint on prices in markets for digital or cultural goods? This paper evaluates how community attention and sentiment relate to valuation in major Ethereum NFT collections after accounting for time effects, market-wide conditions, and persistent visual heterogeneity. Transaction data for large generative collections are merged with Reddit-based discourse measures available for 25 collections, covering 87{, }696 secondary-market sales from January 2021 through March 2025. Visual differences are absorbed by a transparent, within-collection standardized index built from explicit image traits and aggregated via PCA. Discourse is summarized at the collection-by-bin level using discussion intensity and lexicon-based tone measures, with smoothing to reduce noise when text volume is sparse. A mixed-effects specification with a Mundlak within--between decomposition separates persistent cross-collection differences from within-collection fluctuations. Valuations align most strongly with sustained collection-level attention and sentiment environments; within collections, short-horizon negativity is consistently associated with higher prices, and attention is most informative when measured as cumulative engagement over multiple prior windows. |
| Date: | 2026–02 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2602.01531 |
| By: | González, Antonio Blanco; del Campo Villares, José Luis |
| Abstract: | In any product whose evaluation involves taste factors, subjectivity is a determining factor. For this reason, a rating or evaluation system is sometimes proposed to help potential consumers navigate different decision-making alternatives. In recent decades, the wine sector has been characterized by the use of ratings issued by specialized critics. This access channel serves as a means of knowledge for potential customers who have not physically seen the product and who, upon seeing the ratings received by these critics, see them as an influential factor in their final decision-making. Making a decision based on the numerical rating given by a wine reviewer after tasting a wine, where the wine is awarded the maximum score (100 points), can have a positive influence on the consumer's decision. However, not all critics, and consequently their ratings, have the same relevance to the final buyer. This work designed a methodology and proposed a formulation that objectively assesses the real influence of a wine's highest rating by a critic, based on its increased online visibility, search volume, and references in digital media. Several indicators were designed to compare the influence of different critics' scores over a time horizon of one to four weeks after a wine received its highest rating. The study examined whether the highest rating awarded by a specialized wine reviewer has the same impact in all cases or whether it depends on the critic. It also determined the duration of its influence over time. |
| Date: | 2026–01–28 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:socarx:5kd4v_v1 |
| By: | Annie Liang; Jay Lu |
| Abstract: | Copyright law focuses on whether a new work is "substantially similar" to an existing one, but generative AI can closely imitate style without copying content, a capability now central to ongoing litigation. We argue that existing definitions of infringement are ill-suited to this setting and propose a new criterion: a generative AI output infringes on an existing work if it could not have been generated without that work in its training corpus. To operationalize this definition, we model generative systems as closure operators mapping a corpus of existing works to an output of new works. AI generated outputs are \emph{permissible} if they do not infringe on any existing work according to our criterion. Our results characterize structural properties of permissible generation and reveal a sharp asymptotic dichotomy: when the process of organic creations is light-tailed, dependence on individual works eventually vanishes, so that regulation imposes no limits on AI generation; with heavy-tailed creations, regulation can be persistently constraining. |
| Date: | 2026–02 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2602.12270 |