Hi all, Here is an idea I have been working on to help us host Free Software, build Free Hardware, and also to generally gain more User Freedom in the physical world.
---- The GNU GPL uses Copyright to enforce Copyleft which requires Users gain access to the 'Sources' of the 'Objects' they use. Objects are finished goods, such as a computer program, but might also be something as ordinary as a loaf of bread. Sources are the "preferred form of the work for making modifications to [future instances] of it". This includes (but is not limited to) human-readable "source code" and supporting scripts for making a program, but might also mean the recipe and designs of supporting tools required to make bread. We can think of Sources as the Immaterial Means of Production for any Object. They are required to make those Objects, and to modify future instances of those Objects, but they are not enough to fully guarantee User Freedom. We also need the Material Means of Production to write and store and express programs or to make and store bread. So, while the GNU GPL can be applied to the Immaterial parts of most anything, we need another legal instrument to insure Users can access the Material Means of Production. This may seems like an impossible goal since Material Sources have real costs that cannot be ignored. ... I thought about this problem for a very long time. In the meantime I kept hearing about large corporations controlling more and more of the production we need, and collecting more and more Profit along the way. It seemed obvious we could use part of that Profit collected from the Users to buy and build the Material Means of Production that those Users need to insure their freedom, but how could we ever get these corporations to do such a thing? Then I remembered the GNU GPL is a voluntary agreement that is applied by those who *choose* to constrain their *own* holdings. So we, as groups who want to insure User Freedom in the Material realm, can buy real Property such as land and tools and plants and animals, etc. and then *choose* to apply a legally-binding agreement over that physical property, that treats part of Profit as an investment from the User who paid - causing ownership in the growth of that organization to be automatically and continuously distributed to those who pay for that growth. Since these new Owners will also be Users of the very Objects of that production, they can accept those Objects as the "Return on Investment". This creates a very strange dynamic where Profit is driven toward zero. When Users own the Material Means of Production and accept the Object itself (such as a loaf of bread) as ROI, there is no need to sell the Object at all since it is already the property of those who will use it, so the Price each user pays as a consumer is exactly the Costs they each paid as a co-owner, and Profit does not exist at all because the final transaction (selling the Object) does not occur. So by treating (at least part of) Profit as the payer's investment, Users incrementally gain property ownership in the Material Means of Production, eventually giving them the control they have always sought, and achieving those results at no more than the real Costs of Production. If these Users have surplus Objects, they can sell them to Users who do not yet have enough Property, and even charge Profit against them, but must (according to the agreement we still need to write) treat some of that Profit as the payer's investment so that all Users gain freedom in the Material Realm by gaining access to the Material Means of Production. ---- Sincerely, Patrick Anderson
