The strengths of immutability, transparency, and decentralization are build on a foundation that must ignore copyrights, so a structure replacing the value of copyright — long term monetization — must be provided. Without it, can Hive ever go mainstream?
This is a continuation of something started at @sajannair/qbg02d which I replied to in a comment, but things are getting post sized and this post is largely a reply to the post where some methods/systems of long term monetization were mentioned. You can read that, “Is Hive just a 7 day show?” at @sajannair/hive-a-7-day-show-vs-longer-engagements-for-content-makers
As mentioned in that post by 
The problem for legacy methods like banners or other sites is that Hive undermines them (the content can always be accessed ad-free via Hive), so why would a content creator with a large enough following want to post on Hive? Say the creator gets big by going viral with an old post and everybody is linking to the transparent, ad-free Hive side of it — no rewards. This means depending on legacy methods encourages the creator to stop posting on Hive (or not even start on Hive) in case the content is good enough for long-term or future interest. Creators can’t just post for the 7 day reward then move the content at the end because the blockchain is immutable and posting to it inherently means you grant others the right to access it for all time.
Donations are a partial option. They are something I considered of when first commenting on this subject in regards to a system that allows continued monetization of old posts, essentially donations to old posts could be leveraged for even better long-term value to creators. Donations are already available and should always be available — but I was thinking they would be very valuable as one variable when looking at a system that determines top/trending posts of the past for remonetization. Donations without a remonetization system is insufficient in my view because they still restrict the draw Hive can have for creators that have already “made it” — the amount of an audience that will donate is generally much smaller than the amount of an audience that will upvote and participate so simply advertising on a site they control is better. However, more people will donate if even tiny donations can help remonetize the content — much like a ‘matching donation’ system used by nonprofit organizations to “make your donation go twice as far.”
As part of a system for determining top/trending old posts, though, I know one has to worry about donations from sock puppets attempting to reactivate monetization. This could be minimized easily like taking some percentage of donations and doing something (a burn off? Or putting that percentage in a reward pot for other old posts? charging a monetization reactivation fee that goes to witnesses?). Of course, a burn-free/direct donation would be a transfer to the author not penalized but also not linked to a post and therefore not linked to remonetization of an old post.
Anyway, without long-term monetization built in as part of the system it is inherently limited to beginners and those who cannot otherwise utilize traditional monetization (censored content creators, for example). This means Hive is currently mostly attractive to those that are not mainstream creators, and may never be attractive enough to get the mainstream creators onto a decentralized platform. Depending on third-party or traditional solutions increases the barrier to entry for long-term monetization while decreasing the likelihood that they will be a part of how an audience retrieves the contnet, but if long-term monetization is a part of the systems used to retrieve the content then long-term monetization comes with no barrier to entry (included in posting) and will regularly be implemented by content retrieval systems. I believe it is essential for making Hive more attractive to major players.
