Re: IANG license translation draft

On 8/2/07, Dmytri Kleiner <dk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Regarding naming, while IANG (IANG Aint No GNU) is funny, I think the
recursive acronym joke and reference to GNU is too much an insider thing.

I am hoping that we can have a license that appeals to wide range of
artists, software developers, etc.

I suggest something like "Peer Production License", the initials PPL can
also can be an acronym pronounced "people".

If possible, I propose we work together to create such a peer production
license.

Dmytri Kleiner wrote:

> "Creative Contribution" means any modification of the Creation in the
> sense of intellectual property rights, including but not limited to
> adaptation, correction, translation, sampling, incorporation of, or in
> another work.

What about other forms of labour contribution in the manufacturing and
distribution process?

> "Creative Contributor" means an individual or legal entity bringing
> Creative Contributions to a Creative Project.

Would prefer something like "Labour Contribution" meaning any individual
or legal identity contributing labour to the development, manufacturing
or distribution of the creation.

In the productive cycle all workers should own the common-stock, the
printing press operators as much as the song writers.

> "Economic Contribution" means any form of monetary contribution,
> including but not limited to donation, purchase, subscription,
> assessment, investment, capital.

IMO, there can not really be an "economic contribution," "investment"
and "capital," in the sense of selling equity to private owners is
incompatible with commons-based production. "Purchase," "Subscription,"
etc, are not contributions, but rather simple exchanges.

"donation" is perhaps an exception to this, as it is a non-alienating
contribution.

"capital" in the sense of interest-bearing loan, is likewise not a
contribution as the money must be returned, including interest.

An interest-free loan of money may be considered a contribution to the
amount of the interest.

I am not sure what is meant by "assessment."

> 3.2. CREATIVE PARTICIPATION
>
> Creative Contributors can participate, according to the conditions
> specified in article 6, in all technical or artistic decisions
> concerning the Creative Project, including but not limited to
> development orientations and priorities, integration and combination of
> the different works into the Creation.

I am a little confused as to how all "Creative Contributors" can
participate in all "all technical or artistic decisions."

In the context of commons-based peer production, each peer producer
should be free to make whatever technical or artistic decisions they
want when employing the common-stock in their own production, so long as
the conform to the terms of the license.

> 4. DISTRIBUTION
>
> Distribution of the Creation, or its reproduction or modification, by
> the User to any person is unrestricted provided that it is governed by
> this license without any modification or additional clause, and that it
> is accompanied by all informations specified in articles 2 and 3. These
> informations must also be transmitted to any person asking for them, for
> a cost not exceeding those of data transmission.

Not sure about "These informations must also be transmitted to any
person asking for them, for a cost not exceeding those of data
transmission."

I reluctant to place any responsive future obligations on peer producers
not engaging in commercial distribution, whatever is required to be
transmitted, should have been in the distribution itself.

> 5.2. ECONOMIC PARTICIPATION
>
> Economic Contributors can participate, according to the conditions
> specified in article 6, in all economical decisions relative to the
> Economic Project, including but not limited to priorities and amounts of
> investments and remunerations, distribution of profits, financing policy
> and selling price of all products or services including the Creation.

Not sure why this is a required clause. "Economic Contributors," in this
case equity holders in legal entities engaging in commercial
distribution already have all the right listed.

I am more interested in limiting the economic contributors to the
non-alienating types, i.e. donations and interest-free loans. All other
economic input should not be considered a contribution, and
private-equity should be explicitly rejected, as this represent
enclosure and not commons.

> 6.2. MODALITIES
>
> Participation is unrestricted and gratis, and its material organisation
> is assigned to the Contributors. Each Project is autonomous, including
> in respect to Projects concerning original or derived creations, and
> each Contributor is autonomous within a Project. Each Contributor has a
> voice in all decisions concerning the Project and concerning all its
> Contributors, including admission of new Contributors in the Project.

I am a little confused as to how this relates to 3.2. Is 3.2 meant to be
apply to the internal participation within a project? If so, perhaps
the terms it makes should be in the PARTICIPATION section instead.

I think this is overall a great approach, defining participation and
requiring financial information to be public is great.

The main area that is missing for me is the limitations on Economic
Contribution, in particular the prohibition of a User employing private
property and wage-labour to capture surplus-value derived from
common-stock of creations.

--
Dmytri Kleiner <dk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
editing text files since 1981

http://www.dialstation.com
- International calling from your mobile phone.
- Requires no special software to use, just your phone.
- First call free, no sign up, just call!