Re: [ox-en] Material peer production (Part 4: What Difference Does It Make?)

• From: "Michel Bauwens" <michelsub2004 gmail.com>
• Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:46:08 +0700

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
free software may be charged for, but as long as it is also available for
free, it would not be contrary to the definition of peer production ...

if you get paid for deliverables, then that would not be peer production as
we understand it, but it can still create a commons which can be used by
others for further peer production, since it creates open and free raw
material

Michel

On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:52 PM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius gmail.com>wrote:

On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 4:04 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 gmail.com>
wrote:

I go back to my distinction between self-aggregation as unproblematic in

the

'immaterial sphere', but more problematic in the cost-recovery requiring
material sphere.

I agree cost-recovery is a primary issue.

But there are real costs associated with any and all production.
Writing software requires at least a physical computer and physical
electricity, and probably an internet connection.  These costs are
real and recurring.

Free Software developers have always had the option of charging
customers a price for access to that which they create.  They can even
charge more than cost and collect profit without breaking the license
agreement.

Whichever license they choose, it is only a Free Software license if
it allows commercialization (charging a price for) of that work.

Richard Stallman himself used to charge for updates of the first
software to use the GNU GPL: the GNU Emacs text editor.

If Peer Production requires participation be "free as in beer", then
Free Software development is not a P2P activity because it allows
cost-recovery to be solved through direct billing of those requesting
that product.

So if requiring payment for participation (for cost-recovery and even
for profit) is not allowed in P2P, then Free Software is not P2P.

Sincerely,
Patrick
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de

-- 
The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
alternatives.

Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p

Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU

KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/


[2 text/html]
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de

• References:
  • [ox-en] Material peer production (Part 4: What Difference Does It Make?)
    • From: Christian Siefkes
  • Re: [ox-en] Material peer production (Part 4: What Difference Does It Make?)
    • From: Stefan Merten
  • Re: [ox-en] Material peer production (Part 4: What Difference Does It Make?)
    • From: Michel Bauwens
  • Re: [ox-en] Material peer production (Part 4: What Difference Does It Make?)
    • From: Patrick Anderson

• Next in thread: Re: [ox-en] Material peer production (Part 4: What Difference Does It Make?)
• Previous in thread: Re: [ox-en] Material peer production (Part 4: What Difference Does It Make?)
• First in thread: Re: Material peer production (was: Re: [ox-en] Motto for the 4th conference)
• Last in thread: Re: [ox-en] Re: Material peer production (Part 0: Traits of Peer Production)
• Previous thread: [ox-en] REMINDER: COMMUNIA workshop on Technology and the public domain, Torino, Italy, 18/01/2008
• Next thread: Re: [ox-en] Re: Material peer production (was: Re: [ox-en] Motto for the 4th conference)
• Next by Date: Re: [ox-en] Re: What's wrong with powerful maintainers?
• Prev by Date: Re: [ox-en] Review of peerconomy book