Tue 23 Sep 2014 6:59AM

P2P Economics and Commons-Based Reciprocity Licenses

ST Simon Tegg Public Seen by 182

Forking the relevant discussion in the openappjs update


Bob Haugen Tue 23 Sep 2014 7:19AM

@simontegg - Do you want to focus on P2P economics or reciprocity licenses or their interaction? Or did you just want to get these topics out of the already overloaded openappsjs update discussion?;-}


Simon Tegg Tue 23 Sep 2014 10:40AM

@bobhaugen not too worried, I guess the latter :)

My initial thoughts are that I'm keen for CBRL that:
* allows non-commercial organisations to use the software freely
* encourages commercial, commons/mission-oriented organisations to autonomously set their own license 'fee' ideally as a percentage of revenue in projects that use the software, even if this amount is token. These might be Open-Value Networks, worker coops, social enterprises etc. Unsure about non-profits 'cos IKEA, FIFA and so on are non-profits and they mostly use it as a tax loop hole.
* asks commercial for-profit entities to pay license fee unless they contribute to the code. For simplicity this might be a flat yearly fee. A % of revenue might be too hard a sell.


[email protected] Tue 23 Sep 2014 12:26PM

#Reference #License #PeerProduction

Nice. For reference, link to one of such licenses :


[email protected] Tue 23 Sep 2014 12:50PM

#Money #Governance #Power #Centralization

May be interesting to find out what variants can be developed, understand where money flows to when forking code, and understanding , if all money flows to the same organization, how the money is managed ( and if other people contributing to code and/or forking it have their say ? ).


[email protected] Tue 23 Sep 2014 12:51PM

#Permissiveness #Virality #vsLibre

Also understand the viral aspect of such licenses, and how permissive they can be.

How different from Libre licenses, viral or non viral ? (GPL , MIT , ... )


[email protected] Tue 23 Sep 2014 12:53PM

#Stakeholders #SocialEconomy #Sales #Pitch

I imagine early adopters within the "social economy" segment of economic activity may be interested by these kinds of licenses. Will it bridge to other segments of the economy ? Possibly government related ?

In Europe, it is estimated that 1 job in 10 is occupied by what they call "The Social Economy". ( http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/promoting-entrepreneurship/social-economy/ )

What interest would small or bigger for profit companies have in supporting it ? Because its cheaper ( is it ? ) ? Because there is more "fairness" ? ( and is there really , more fairness ? ) More transparency ? Because it works better ? Or because it is a better way of enabling the financing of research and development, in a networked approach, with less money spent on paying shareholder dividends related to proprietary licenses ?


[email protected] Tue 23 Sep 2014 1:01PM

#Overlap #Governance #Ideology #History

And how does it relate, broader speaking, in terms of "ideologies" ? Can it enable a convergence, a synthesis, a diversity, an "update" ?


#PeerProduction License" Vs ( updating ? ) #GeoLibertarianism , #Mutualism , #Distributism , ...

Synergies possible ?

Can, for example,
certain licenses such as forms of Peer Production Licenses

be adapted for forms of GeoLibertarianism ( or Mutualism, or Distributism , ... )

in a way that updates the notion of commons, and income through labour
( knowledge as commons , automation, ... ? )

in some of these ideologies ( midst others ),
ideologies seem to have developed when production may have been more dependent on land,
or when ( older notions of ? ) labour was still much more central to production ?


Geolibertarians consider land to be the common property of all humankind. They say that private property is derived from an individual's right to the fruits of their labor. Since land was not created by anyone's labor, it cannot be rightfully owned. Thus, geolibertarians recognize a right to secure possession of land (land tenure), on the condition that the full rental value be paid to the community. This, they say, has the effect of both giving back the value that belongs to the community and encouraging landholders to only use as much land as they need, leaving unneeded land for others.




[email protected] Tue 23 Sep 2014 1:02PM

#Forums #Loomio

Interesting to look into other conversations around license, on loomio forums :



[email protected] Tue 23 Sep 2014 1:27PM

#Tax #Redistribution #TaxEvasion #Power

If one considers a fee ,
and if such fee is applied to people outside of the not for profit and peer production realm, how to determine who has the power to decide who is who ?

If one for example imagines corporations setting up not for profits to conglomerate common interests amongst them, conglomerates which would be supporting peer production related to their own interests, while using tools developed by organizations and people supporting peer production licenses ?

First, would it be counter productive to exclude them ?
And second, would it be considered as "tax evasion" if they are included, contribute , yet do not pay fees while enabling them to develop peerproduced components or services supporting , further in the chain, other proprietary components or services ?

Load More