<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2014-03-17 3:59 GMT+01:00 Michel Bauwens <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">michel@p2pfoundation.net</a>></span>:<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small"><div><p>
</p></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small"><div><p><b>Socialist Licenses?</b> by Stefan Meretz -- From my perspective the presentation of the GPL as “communist” is
wrong, but this attribution has the function to propagate a milder
license variant which then is called “socialist”: the <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_License" target="_blank">PPL (Peer-Production-License)</a>.
This license only grants external access to the resources to those who
are using them non-commercially, while internally unlimited exploitation
is allowed. (...) But what is commercial? <br></p></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></div><div><br></div><div>That's an important aspect. On the PPL internally unlimited exploitation is allowed if <b>"You are a workerowned business or workerowned collective".<br>
<br></b></div><div>IMHO this is not sufficient to describe a Peer Production Organization. Is needed, as I before stated, a charter to define it.<br></div><div> </div></div></div></div>