Voluntary Basic Capital License
= "the voluntary basic capital license, VBCL), would be similar to the GPL but would designate by law that anyone using the source code has to agree to the social consensus".
"So if the social consensus is that all verified humans get some percentage of all businesses who use that license then the license now has the teeth of the traditional legal system similar to the GPL."
From 'Danaswarm' via Joel Dietz:
"1) Create a new software license called the voluntary basic capital license (VBCL). This would be similar to the GPL but would designate by law that anyone using the source code has to agree to the social consensus. So if the social consensus is that all verified humans get some percentage of all businesses who use that license then the license now has the teeth of the traditional legal system similar to the GPL.
2) A DCO is required. Swarm got this part right and did the legal legwork to formalize the "community oriented DAC" into the DCO. I think Swarm got this part better than right.
3) Enforce the social contract of the community as a smart contract, in code, so that the moment the person installs the app instead of seeing "terms of service agreement" legalese they are asked "do you agree with the social contract of our community"? At that point the social contract should be presented to them and if they agree to it then if the app has transaction taxes then their use of the app will become basic income through transaction taxes.
4) The community should enforce through reputation. Most people want to give back to society, to their community, to mankind, because it helps them to look good and it's good for reputation. In a blockchain based world reputation can be decentralized, transparent, and people who use certain apps will be looked upon differently. So reputation is an enforcement mechanism for the social contract along with the voluntary basic capital license if it's a corporation the community has to deal with.
The software license should exist to protect the community from corporations coming along, forking, taking the best technologies developed, and then not giving anything back to the community.
The DCO is to protect the community from government legal actions.
The social contract existing as a smart contract or in code embeds it into the app to protect the social contract from being tampered with without community social consensus backing the changes.
The decentralized reputation element is to encourage the community to support itself. It's easy to encourage people to give something back when the givers get a reputation and the takers get a reputation. Bittorrent used this idea of seeders and leechers to great success and while it isn't something directly enforced there is a ratio which easily allowed people to not share with anyone who has a bad ratio. The same could happen in business interactions where smart contracts could look for some adherence to the social contract of the community and if the entrepreneur doesn't meet the minimum then the community doesn't have to provide any sort of good reviews to their business."
Why the Voluntary Basic Capital License is important
"Voluntary Basic Capital is an experimental approach to resolving some of the outstanding concerns around technological unemployment. Voluntary Basic Capital takes the unique approach of making participants into stakeholders in the future of their communities. The Voluntary Basic Capital License is the legal extension of this experimental approach which applies copyleft as a legal enforcement mechanism.
Voluntary Basic Capital is a unique approach because it is voluntary. Because it is voluntary it requires no state coercion, it also requires no poltiical permission because any developer can adopt the license. It is also capable of being enforced by the legal system much like the highly successful GPL or creative commons." (https://swarm.fund/projects/Voluntary_Basic_Capital_License_1432926931)
- a crowd sourced draft of the Voluntary Basic Capital License: