Connect with us

Interviews

Exclusive Q&A with Paul Sampson, CEO of Lickd

Published

on

exclusive-q&a-with-paul-sampson,-ceo-of-lickd
Reading Time: 5 minutes

 

One quick thing that came to mind after conducting the interview was: this man knows the industry. So Ladies and Gentlemen, meet Paul Sampson, CEO of Lickd.

For starterrs, Lickd is a micro-licensing and music solutions company that caters to the creator economy. If that sounds obscure, jump straight to the interview, where Paul Simpson talks in simple terms about Lickd and the present and future of the online music industry.

Q. Let’s start with a brief personal profile. Tell us about your background and career?

A. I’ve been working in music licensing since 2005. I’ve worked specifically with stock music, commercial music, and more recently, exploring ways of strengthening the creator economy.

For around five years, straight out of university, I worked in television at a small production company, climbing through the ranks. Throughout this time, I encountered the difficulties of licensing music several times, and so began to take an interest in understanding the nuances and problems that needed solving.

I’d gotten to know several renowned music licensing companies, and in 2005, one of them, Extreme Music, offered me a job in New York and with that, I followed my passion and began my career jump into the music industry. Within about two and a half years in the role, they relocated me out to Los Angeles as the Head of US.

In 2010, a new role brought me back to Europe and I was a key figure in launching the European arm of another U.S. music licensing company. This time, it was not just stock music, but a focus on more commercial music, and unsigned independent acts.

After this, I knew it was time to start acting on the music opportunities that were becoming more prevalent with the boom of the creator economy, and so following that channel, Lickd was born in 2017.

Q. Now let’s move on to Lickd. What led you to found Lickd?

A. Two words led me to found Lickd: Creator Economy. As social media became more prevalent in everyday life in the late 2000’s, the opportunities for music and creators were plentiful and so Lickd was born. A few years later, as the effects on the media landscape following the pandemic have increased the creator economy twofold, we see even more opportunities to continue to seize the moment, and the market.

Lickd is the first music company to ever develop a major music solution for content creators of all kinds. We licence music from major labels and publishers, including current music that’s in the charts and make it available for licensing, legally. Our unique software protects our users on the platform that they place music on, for example, YouTube and Instagram. Platforms like YouTube have built in music recognition software that identifies popular music being used in content, and presumes that all music uses are some sort of infringement of copyright, therefore, persecuting the creator and attempting to police them out of earning revenue.

Lickd’s software is really the magic solution that the platform sits on top of to ensure that not only can creators licence the music but that they’re taken care of and we’re protecting their revenue all the way through to the end of the content journey.

Q. What is Lickd’s specialty? 

A. What sets us apart is that we are unique in our offering. We’re working with 10,000+ labels and publishers that are linked to the Lickd platform, including Universal, Warner, Sony, BMG and Kobalt. To engage labels and publishers like that and to preclear their music for any content vertical is something that was once largely thought impossible, but Lickd has made it happen and is helping to secure new revenue streams for creators globally.

Q. Could you talk about your work with key gaming powerhouses?

A. Gaming is obviously an enormous industry, bigger than music and film combined. Any content vertical with that sort of reach has a huge platform, a huge audience to work with and promote music too.

In terms of how Lickd got together with Fortnite and Epic Games; essentially music became part of their engagement strategy, and they started paying more attention to it. Senior teams were asking key questions like: ‘how can we work with artists’ and ‘what sort of artist does our audience want to hear within a game’?

With this comes complexities around licensing and demographics. Gamers who are also content creators often live stream their content or create highlights videos for YouTube. At Lickd, we already know that in-video music on YouTube is an issue and so we collaborate with Fortnite to bridge that gap so that gamers can enjoy the wonderful events that are put on for them, while also being able to then promote and share that content in the ways that they normally would.

Whether this is for ancillary income or additional income on top of a salary, if content creation is a full-time job, Lickd protects creators on those platforms, to enable a more effective creation and lifecycle process for the content they’re publishing.

Q. Could you briefly narrate the content deals you have with music companies and bands?

A. Over the past five years we’ve built a platform that is made up of popular music from 10,000 labels and publishers, including Universal, Warner, Sony BMG and Kobalt. We also work with lots of independent distributors. There’s around 1.4 million songs on Lickd, and another 6 million delivered and waiting to go live. The vast majority of them would be emerging acts and we certainly do our best to help and encourage discovery on the platform.

Q. In what ways does Lickd help creators to monetise their content?

A. I think it’s important to outline that wherever there is opportunity for the music industry online, it will require some sort of micro licensing commercial model, and some sort of proprietary tech, either to enable the licensing or to protect the end user.

That’s where Lickd is perfectly positioned. Our mission is to democratise music for the world’s creators. Our first product looked at creators as video content creators, but as the world changes and the digital landscape evolves, creators will also include builders in the metaverse and big brands on social platforms.

Q. How do you see the possibility of an AI text-to-background-music generator?

A. There’s various ways that AI will impact music. It’s something we’re following closely and it would be foolish for anyone to suggest that any part of the music industry isn’t already seeing some element of business being affected directly by AI. So far we’ve seen AI generated songs, well known songs of one artist being sung in the AI voice of another, and the fact that chords and melodies can be created by simply inputting into an AI, and we’re always expecting more.

The uptake of AI in music creation won’t be instant, but at some point, creators will become of faith with smart tools that allow them to generate music through these new means for use in videos. Although, once created, that music will still need to be licensed, and there will be commercial models that give users access to the tools and/or licensing opportunities for the music created by said tool.

In the metaverse, there will be music collaboration spaces and music  production event areas or venues. Generative AI is useful for creating ‘music stems’, and building a sort of catalogue of music elements that can then be used by people collaboratively to start making an entire song – something that was not happening in the past.

An AI can continuously keep churning out new beats and new melodies and new riffs and new instrumental sounds, and people will get together to create music on the fly, and that will require AI generative tools at some scale. I think you’ll see things like musical skins, where Avatars might want their own soundtrack or music identifier. How do I know someone entered the room? Well, I just heard their music handle to signify they’re here. Like boxers have ring walks, there’ll be a version of that somewhere in the metaverse.

We know that there are music metaverses and venues, and metaverse platforms based around music creation already, and there are others on the way. A good example of this is Pixelynx, Deadmau5’s music based metaverse platform. He founded the platform, one that was completely based around the music, but then was acquired by Animoca Brands, a brand with a broad portfolio of web3, blockchain and traditional games, which is a huge web3 holding company, so from launch to exit, Deadmau5 did very well out of the partnership.

apuestas deportivas

¿Son las casas de apuestas las culpables o la arquitectura económica construida por Brasil en los últimos 35 años?

Published

on

¿son-las-casas-de-apuestas-las-culpables-o-la-arquitectura-economica-construida-por-brasil-en-los-ultimos-35-anos?
¿Son las casas de apuestas las culpables o la arquitectura económica construida por Brasil en los últimos 35 años?

Esta es la pregunta central planteada por Carlos Akira Sato en su análisis sobre el creciente endeudamiento de los hogares en Brasil.

En lugar de atribuir el sobreendeudamiento a las plataformas de apuestas deportivas, sostiene que el problema tiene sus raíces en décadas de transformación económica marcadas por la expansión del crédito, la financiarización y sistemas cada vez más sofisticados de estimulación del consumo en múltiples sectores.

El debate sobre el endeudamiento de las familias brasileñas ha ganado un nuevo objetivo preferente: las plataformas de apuestas deportivas.

Las llamadas “bets” han pasado a ocupar un lugar central en los medios, el discurso político y las discusiones regulatorias, frecuentemente asociadas al aumento de la morosidad y la compulsividad financiera.

Pero quizá la pregunta correcta sea otra: ¿el sobreendeudamiento de las familias brasileñas realmente nació con las bets?

La respuesta, desde un análisis histórico riguroso, es negativa.

El fenómeno es mucho anterior a la regulación de las apuestas deportivas y está vinculado a una profunda transformación económica, cultural y tecnológica iniciada en los años 90, cuando Brasil abandonó gradualmente una economía cerrada e inflacionaria para entrar en una lógica moderna de consumo, crédito y financiarización de la vida cotidiana.

La apertura económica promovida durante el gobierno de Collor cambió el patrón de consumo del país.
Pocos años después, el Plan Real trajo estabilidad monetaria y transformó la propia psicología económica de la población.

Por primera vez, millones de brasileños comenzaron a financiar bienes, usar tarjetas de crédito, pagar en cuotas e incorporar el endeudamiento como parte normal de la vida económica.

Este proceso representó un avance y una inclusión financiera.

Pero también consolidó un nuevo modelo económico basado en la anticipación del ingreso futuro de los hogares. El crédito dejó de ser una excepción y se convirtió en infraestructura permanente de sostén del consumo nacional.

Bancos, minoristas y entidades financieras comprendieron rápidamente este cambio. Grandes cadenas dejaron de actuar únicamente como distribuidoras de productos para convertirse en plataformas financieras.

Las tarjetas private label, los sistemas de financiación sofisticados y los mecanismos permanentes de crédito pasaron a integrar la vida cotidiana del consumidor. En muchos casos, el margen financiero se volvió tan relevante como la propia venta del producto.

A lo largo de los años 2000, el modelo se profundizó.

La expansión de la bancarización, de los medios electrónicos de pago y de las fintech aceleró la financiarización de la vida cotidiana.

A partir de 2013, con la apertura regulatoria impulsada por la Ley nº 12.865, el celular pasó a funcionar simultáneamente como banco, billetera digital, plataforma de crédito, marketplace y entorno permanente de monetización del comportamiento.

El crédito se volvió instantáneo, invisible e integrado a la experiencia digital.

El consumidor pasó a contratar financiación en pocos clics, muchas veces dentro del propio flujo de compra. Brasil entró definitivamente en la era de la hiperestimulación conductual del consumo.

Y aquí es donde el debate contemporáneo comienza a revelar una contradicción importante.

Mientras el país construyó durante décadas una sofisticada arquitectura económica basada en expansión del crédito, publicidad emocional, gamificación, captura de la atención y monetización del ingreso futuro, la inversión estructural en educación financiera siguió siendo insuficiente.

Brasil enseñó a su población a consumir antes de enseñarle a construir patrimonio.

Hoy, prácticamente todos los sectores relevantes de la economía operan mecanismos avanzados de estímulo conductual: retail digital, aplicaciones, streaming, delivery, marketplaces, bancos, fintechs y redes sociales.

La publicidad dejó de ser meramente informativa y pasó a ser algorítmica, personalizada y emocional.

El consumidor moderno compite por su atención y autocontrol contra sistemas diseñados para maximizar el engagement y el consumo continuo.

Este fenómeno aparece incluso en sectores raramente asociados al debate regulatorio.

El comercio alimentario, por ejemplo, utiliza técnicas sofisticadas de neuromarketing para impulsar el consumo de productos ultraprocesados, bebidas alcohólicas e ítems de compra impulsiva. Sin embargo, pocos segmentos han enfrentado un nivel de monitoreo similar al impuesto a las apuestas deportivas.

El sector regulado de las bets surgió en Brasil bajo uno de los marcos más estrictos de la economía digital.

Las plataformas deben identificar usuarios biométricamente, monitorear el comportamiento, rastrear operaciones, comunicar movimientos sospechosos al COAF, implementar políticas de juego responsable e impedir apuestas financiadas con crédito.

Es decir: el regulador entendió correctamente que la combinación entre compulsividad y crédito podía ser socialmente explosiva.

Pero aquí surge una pregunta inevitable: ¿por qué sectores históricamente asociados al sobreendeudamiento de las familias brasileñas operaron durante décadas bajo niveles significativamente menores de monitoreo conductual?

Datos de la CNC muestran que el porcentaje de familias endeudadas alcanzó el 80,2% en febrero de 2026 — el nivel más alto de la serie histórica.

Este escenario no nació con las bets. Es el resultado de décadas de expansión agresiva del crédito, financiarización de la vida cotidiana, hiperestimulación del consumo y ausencia estructural de educación económica de la población.

Marco comparativo : obligaciones regulatorias y conductuales

Tema / Obligación Bets Bancos Retail / Alimentos
Identificación formal del cliente (KYC) Obligatoria, robusta, con biometría Obligatoria Limitada
Validación de titularidad de cuenta Obligatoria Generalmente obligatoria Normalmente inexistente
Monitoreo conductual Alto Enfocado en fraude y crédito Bajo
Prohibición del uso de crédito No No
Publicidad emocional Con restricciones crecientes Permitida con límites Ampliamente utilizada
Protección contra compulsividad Obligatoria Muy limitada Prácticamente inexistente
Herramientas de autoexclusión Obligatorias Inexistentes Inexistentes
Obligación de reporte al COAF Limitada
Control del origen de fondos Obligatorio Obligatorio Generalmente inexistente
Fiscalización conductual Intensa Moderada Baja
Políticas de consumo responsable Obligatorias Parciales Generalmente inexistentes

El punto más provocador quizá sea justamente la asimetría regulatoria que este debate revela.

Varios sectores históricamente asociados a la compulsividad, el hiperconsumo y la dependencia han operado durante décadas bajo una lógica regulatoria menos intervencionista que la actualmente aplicada a las apuestas deportivas.

Al final, el verdadero debate tal vez no sea solo “cómo regular las apuestas”, sino cómo preparar a la sociedad para vivir en una economía digital, hiperinanciarizada y permanentemente orientada a la captura de la atención, el consumo y la monetización conductual.

Carlos Akira Sato
Co-Founder de Fenynx Digital Assets y especialista en Mercados Regulados, Infraestructura Financiera, Gobernanza e Innovación. Vicepresidente de Relaciones Institucionales de PAGOS (Asociación de Gestión de Medios de Pagos Electrónicos).

The post ¿Son las casas de apuestas las culpables o la arquitectura económica construida por Brasil en los últimos 35 años? appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.

Continue Reading

Betting Companies

Are betting operators to blame, or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years?

Published

on

are-betting-operators-to-blame,-or-is-it-brazil’s-economic-framework-of-the-last-35-years?

Are betting companies to blame or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years?

This is the central question raised by Carlos Akira Sato in his analysis of Brazil’s rising household debt.

Rather than attributing over-indebtedness to sports betting platforms, he argues that the issue is rooted in decades of economic transformation shaped by credit expansion, financialization, and increasingly sophisticated systems of consumer stimulation across multiple sectors.

The debate surrounding Brazilian household debt has gained a new preferred target: sports betting platforms.

The so-called “bets” have taken center stage in the news, political discourse, and regulatory discussions, often associated with rising default rates and financial compulsiveness.

But perhaps the correct question is another one: did the over-indebtedness of Brazilian families really begin with bets?

The answer, under a serious historical analysis, is no.

The phenomenon predates the regulation of sports betting by decades and is linked to a profound economic, cultural, and technological transformation that began in the 1990s, when Brazil gradually abandoned a closed and inflationary economy to enter a modern logic of consumption, credit, and the financialization of everyday life.

The economic opening promoted during the Collor administration changed the country’s consumption patterns.

A few years later, the Real Plan brought monetary stability and transformed the population’s economic psychology itself.

For the first time, millions of Brazilians began financing goods, using credit cards, paying in installments, and incorporating debt as a normal part of economic life.

This process represented progress and financial inclusion.

But it also consolidated a new economic model based on the anticipation of families’ future income. Credit ceased to be an exception and became permanent infrastructure supporting national consumption.

Banks, retailers, and financial institutions quickly understood this change. Large retail chains stopped acting solely as product distributors and became financial platforms.

Private-label cards, sophisticated installment plans, and permanent financing mechanisms became part of consumers’ daily lives. In many cases, financial margins became just as relevant as the sale of the products themselves.

Throughout the 2000s, the model deepened.

The expansion of banking access, electronic payment methods, and fintechs accelerated the financialization of everyday life.

From 2013 onward, with the regulatory opening promoted by Law No. 12,865, mobile phones simultaneously became banks, digital wallets, credit platforms, marketplaces, and permanent environments for behavioral monetization.

Credit became instant, invisible, and integrated into the digital experience. Consumers started obtaining financing in just a few clicks, often within the purchasing flow itself. Brazil definitively entered the era of behavioral hyperstimulation of consumption.

And this is where the contemporary debate begins to reveal an important contradiction.

While the country spent decades building a sophisticated economic architecture based on credit expansion, emotional advertising, gamification, attention capture, and monetization of future income, structural investment in financial education remained insufficient.

Brazil taught its population how to consume before teaching them how to build wealth.

Today, virtually every relevant sector of the economy operates advanced behavioral stimulation mechanisms: digital retail, apps, streaming platforms, delivery services, marketplaces, banks, fintechs, and social networks.

Advertising is no longer merely informative; it has become algorithmic, personalized, and emotional. The modern consumer competes for attention and self-control against systems designed to maximize engagement and continuous consumption.

This phenomenon appears even in sectors rarely associated with regulatory debates.

The food retail industry, for example, uses sophisticated neuromarketing techniques to boost the consumption of ultra-processed foods, alcoholic beverages, and impulse-buy products. Yet few segments have faced a level of monitoring similar to that imposed on sports betting.

Brazil’s regulated betting sector emerged under one of the strictest frameworks in the digital economy.

Platforms are required to biometrically identify users, monitor behavior, track transactions, report suspicious activity to COAF, implement responsible gaming policies, and prevent bets financed through credit.

The Brazilian model requires prior deposits and prohibits “uncovered” betting.

In other words, regulators correctly understood that the combination of compulsiveness and credit could become socially explosive.

But here an inevitable question arises: why have sectors historically associated with the over-indebtedness of Brazilian families operated for decades under significantly lower levels of behavioral monitoring?

Data from CNC show that the percentage of indebted families reached 80.2% in February 2026 — the highest level in the historical series.

This scenario did not begin with bets. It is the result of decades of aggressive credit expansion, financialization of daily life, hyperstimulation of consumption, and the structural absence of economic education for the population.

Comparative framework: regulatory and behavioral obligations

Topic / Obligation Betting operators Banks Retail / Food
Formal customer identification (KYC) Mandatory, robust, biometric Mandatory Limited
Account ownership validation Mandatory Generally mandatory Usually nonexistent
Behavioral monitoring High Focused on fraud and credit Low
Prohibition of credit use Yes No No
Emotional advertising Under increasing restrictions Permitted with limits Widely used
Protection against compulsiveness Mandatory Very limited Practically nonexistent
Self-exclusion tools Mandatory Nonexistent Nonexistent
Obligation to report to COAF Yes Yes Limited
Source-of-funds control Mandatory Mandatory Generally nonexistent
Behavioral oversight Intense Moderate Low
Formal responsible consumption policies Mandatory Partial Generally nonexistent

Perhaps the most provocative point is precisely the regulatory asymmetry revealed by this debate.

Several sectors historically associated with compulsiveness, hyperconsumption, and dependency have operated for decades under a less interventionist regulatory logic than the one currently applied to sports betting.

In the end, the real debate may not simply be “how should betting be regulated?”, but rather how to prepare society to live in a digital, hyper-financialized economy permanently driven by attention capture, consumption, and behavioral monetization.

Carlos Akira Sato
Co-Founder of Fenynx Digital Assets and specialist in Regulated Markets, Financial Infrastructure, Governance, and Innovation. Vice President of Institutional Relations at PAGOS (Association for Electronic Payment Management).

The post Are betting operators to blame, or is it Brazil’s economic framework of the last 35 years? appeared first on Americas iGaming & Sports Betting News.

Continue Reading

BC Engine

BC.Game’s new CEO Kar Kheng Giam on strategy, structure and growth

Published

on

bc.game’s-new-ceo-kar-kheng-giam-on-strategy,-structure-and-growth

Following his appointment as CEO of BC.Game in March, Kar Kheng Giam (KK) speaks about the strategic priorities shaping the company’s next phase, from strengthening operational foundations to navigating the evolving role of crypto within regulated gaming markets.

 

 You’ve stepped into the CEO role at a pivotal time for the industry. How do you assess the current position of BC.Game?

BC.Game enters this stage from a position of strength in terms of product, user engagement and global reach.

At the same time, the broader industry is evolving. Expectations around governance, regulatory alignment and operational maturity are increasing, particularly for businesses operating across multiple jurisdictions.

So while the foundation is strong, there is a clear opportunity to further strengthen the structure of the business to support long-term, sustainable growth.

That foundation is reflected in the scale of the business today, with more than 9 million registered users and over 500,000 monthly active players, and in the progress we’ve made across licensed markets such as Anjouan, Kenya, Nigeria and Mexico.

How would you define the strategic focus for BC.Game over the next 12 to 24 months?

It comes down to three interconnected areas. First, reinforcing the operational and governance framework of the business, ensuring we are well aligned with the expectations of more established regulatory environments.

Second, continuing to invest in the product – not just in terms of content, but in the overall user experience and platform reliability.

And third, taking a disciplined approach to market expansion, focusing on jurisdictions where we can build a sustainable and compliant presence.

It’s about evolving the business in a structured and deliberate way.

You’ve highlighted governance and structure. What does that mean in practical terms?

It means putting in place the systems, processes and organisational clarity needed to operate at scale.

As companies grow internationally, complexity increases – across regulation, payments, technology and operations. Strengthening governance is about ensuring those elements are well coordinated and consistently managed.

This is not about changing what BC.Game is, but about building the framework that allows it to grow more effectively.

Why has trust become so important at this stage?

At BC.GAME’s scale, trust is no longer just about brand but increasingly becomes a business issue – it affects retention, partnerships, market entry and long-term growth.

And trust is built in very practical ways. People judge a platform by whether the rules are clear, whether communication is smooth, and whether issues actually get resolved. That’s why growth on its own is no longer enough.

Where is the most immediate trust pressure on BC.GAME showing up today?

The pressure shows up most clearly in user experience and issue handling because that’s where people feel it first.

Some of the feedback does point to response times and cases where issues stay in the same entry point for too long. When that happens often enough, it becomes bigger than a service issue, it starts to shape trust.

What changes is BC.GAME putting in place in response to these issues?

 We’ve already started making changes. That includes upgrading how user issues are handled, bringing cross-functional teams in earlier, and improving how issues are identified and coordinated internally.

As the business has grown, relying too heavily on a single customer support entry point is no longer enough. The focus now is to make issue handling clearer, more stable, and better suited to the scale of the platform.

What role does organisational development play in this next phase?

As the business grows, it’s important to ensure that the organisation evolves alongside it. That includes strengthening leadership structures, clarifying roles and responsibilities, and building capabilities in key areas such as compliance and market operations.

Ultimately, strategy is only as effective as the organisation delivering it.

From a leadership perspective, how do you approach guiding a globally distributed business?

In a global organisation, alignment is critical – everyone needs to understand the strategic direction and how their role contributes to it. At the same time, there needs to be flexibility to adapt to local market dynamics.

My role is to create that balance – providing clear direction while enabling teams to execute effectively within their markets.

Finally, what does success look like for BC.Game over the next few years?

Success is about building a more structured, resilient and trusted business.

That means strengthening our position in regulated markets, continuing to evolve the product, and ensuring the organisation is equipped to operate at scale. This current period is a crucial one for us as we introduce multiple product rollouts at BC.GAME, with several key updates scheduled to go live. These include BC Engine, along with a broader upgrade to the bonus system and, of course, the World Cup.

If we can achieve that through consistent, incremental progress, then we will be well positioned for the long term.

The post BC.Game’s new CEO Kar Kheng Giam on strategy, structure and growth appeared first on Eastern European Gaming | Global iGaming & Tech Intelligence Hub.

Continue Reading

Trending