Comments on: Building a license better than the GPL http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/07/28/building-a-license-better-than-the-gpl/ the Open Business Project Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:42:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ownut http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/07/28/building-a-license-better-than-the-gpl/comment-page-1/#comment-1105 Ownut Fri, 28 Jul 2006 22:47:50 +0000 http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/07/28/building-a-license-better-than-the-gpl/#comment-1105 Let's bring the power of Copyleft into the tangible universe as Property Lefted Physical Sources. By 'Free' I mean "as in Freedom". As with virtual sources, costs are usually more than zero. By 'Source' I mean any natural or man-made Means of Production - such as Land, Water, Plants, Tools, Energy. Write a General Public Lease to help owners easily offer these Physical Sources under a business model that allows any qualified artisans to bid upon, and with the bidding starting at "minimized costs". Costs are minimized through incentives built into the Lease: Consumers reverse-auction production goals to bidding workers. : This minimizes management and labor costs and maximizes worker ingenuity. * Consumers invest in Sources needed for workers to begin production. : Ownership of Sources insures sovereignty and security. : Investors steer production. : Costs are internalized. * Rent is usually cheaper when paid as a Good or Service of local Use Value. : Promotes sustainability and discourages external profiteering. : Addresses the "exporting during famine" syndrome. * Winning bid is weighted by current holdings and demand. : Efficient workers pay much less rent. : Hoarding workers pay much more rent. * Funds from bids above auction Floor are used to purchase more Sources of this kind. : High demand of that Source increases its availability. Let’s bring the power of Copyleft into the tangible universe as Property Lefted Physical Sources.

By ‘Free’ I mean “as in Freedom”. As with virtual sources, costs are usually more than zero.

By ‘Source’ I mean any natural or man-made Means of Production – such as Land, Water, Plants, Tools, Energy.

Write a General Public Lease to help owners easily offer these Physical Sources under a business model that allows any qualified artisans to bid upon, and with the bidding starting at “minimized costs”.

Costs are minimized through incentives built into the Lease:

Consumers reverse-auction production goals to bidding workers.
: This minimizes management and labor costs and maximizes worker ingenuity.

* Consumers invest in Sources needed for workers to begin production.
: Ownership of Sources insures sovereignty and security.
: Investors steer production.
: Costs are internalized.

* Rent is usually cheaper when paid as a Good or Service of local Use Value.
: Promotes sustainability and discourages external profiteering.
: Addresses the “exporting during famine” syndrome.

* Winning bid is weighted by current holdings and demand.
: Efficient workers pay much less rent.
: Hoarding workers pay much more rent.

* Funds from bids above auction Floor are used to purchase more Sources of this kind.
: High demand of that Source increases its availability.

]]> By: zotz http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/07/28/building-a-license-better-than-the-gpl/comment-page-1/#comment-1104 zotz Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:57:14 +0000 http://www.openbusiness.cc/2006/07/28/building-a-license-better-than-the-gpl/#comment-1104 I fail to see how this is a good idea. Creative Commons has issues now in that it is a useless term for someone looking for Free content. The trouble is that it is the term people use, not the specific licenses that the works are put under. So, when I see an article saying this place has all of this content under a CC license, chances are that most of it is still useless to me and I will have to waste my time searching as for a needle in a haystack to see if perhaps some of it may be under a useful license. Now, in rambling on like this I have thought of something they could do that might make this effort useful: Only have options that are Free and that can, at the downstream user's option, be transitioned to their copyleft option for derivative works. Ditch the EULA idea. Things that different are better off with different names to avoid confusion. Just my (humble) opinion. all the best, drew (da idea man) I fail to see how this is a good idea. Creative Commons has issues now in that it is a useless term for someone looking for Free content. The trouble is that it is the term people use, not the specific licenses that the works are put under.

So, when I see an article saying this place has all of this content under a CC license, chances are that most of it is still useless to me and I will have to waste my time searching as for a needle in a haystack to see if perhaps some of it may be under a useful license.

Now, in rambling on like this I have thought of something they could do that might make this effort useful:

Only have options that are Free and that can, at the downstream user’s option, be transitioned to their copyleft option for derivative works. Ditch the EULA idea. Things that different are better off with different names to avoid confusion.

Just my (humble) opinion.

all the best,

drew
(da idea man)

]]>