@h@fabianhjr@KevinCarson1 Even as he promotes it, Michel is careful to describe it as Copyfair 1.0. So, I'll be curious to see what's next. Meanwhile, I'm going to go ahead and use it, even though you make some good points about it.
@h@fabianhjr@KevinCarson1 The focus is on worker ownership and distribution of surpluses to the worker-owners. It doesn't depend on the legal definition of the organization. It may not be perfect, but as a friend of mine likes to say, a good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow.
@h@fabianhjr "Worker" for this purpose is a member of a worker co-op/collective.
Also, remember that worker co-ops/collectives are the only ones given permission *by default*, but nothing says the license-holder couldn't voluntarily grant permission to someone else. Michel Bauwens thinks the commons will be funded this way, but I think that's pretty optimistic.
@fabianhjr I'm about to start publishing my translations under it. I just wrote a short essay on it, and I hope to have a new website by the end of the week to post it on.
In short, the PPL flips "intellectual property" on its head, because labor can profit from it, while capital cannot.
"And with millions of baby boomer-owned businesses set to change hands in the upcoming decades, this transition could be an opportunity to create more democratic workplaces across the country–if business owners, workers, and advocates can work together to convert these enterprises into #EmployeeOwned#cooperatives."
@ntnsndr I had a local instance working long ago, but a local git repository isn't very useful. I hope to get the new site up and running late next week or early the following week. I want to operate it as a project within the Interpreters' Co-op, so I have to get approval.