Giftfile Project Primes Decentralized Gift Economy

belmo writes "Last week, the Giftfile Project unveiled developer documentation and reference software for the giftfile system. This system enables producers and supporters of computer files containing nonproprietary intellectual works to participate in a gift economy. Tax deductible lump donations, made to nonprofit intermediaries, can be allocated to these files in an automated and efficient manner, supporting transactions as little as .01 USD. Nonproprietary intellectual works include free software, music, and literature. To use the system, you don't have to go to some web site and register--it's decentralized, built on open standards, and does not depend on any for-profit entity. The project is currently targeting free software developers to test the system, help make it accessible to other computer users, and be its first participants."

Comments

How Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

How typical. When a news story concerning **AA, specifically how it is going to sue people who download songs from the internet (I would not be shocked if the songs were Bach Chorales), everyone gets ticked, and we have veritable screaming matches.

Then, when a theoretical solution to the problem of how [composers|programmers|authors] will get compensation, NO ONE CARES!

Re:How Typical

[DerekLyons]

Then, when a theoretical solution to the problem of how [composers|programmers|authors] will get compensation, NO ONE CARES!

It's theoretical alright, and fraught with practical problems.

First off, the 'gift money' is only given to the [composer|programmer|author] on demand... Which means that any interest that acrues will end up as income to the 'giftfile' organization. Lacking any place to spend the money... Where does it go? (Fat salaries for employees and managers is my bet.)

Second off the proponents appear to making the suggestion that their should be multiple gift pools, which makes for a situation ripe with oppurtunities for fraud.

Thirdly; One also wonders how long the nonprofit status will survive, since the company isn't performing charitable, research, or educational functions, but is rather providing 'bank like' functions in distributing income to individuals. (They claim they are 'grants', but the fact that they are monies earmarked for an individual and payable to that individual on demand moves that claim onto *very* shakey ground.) The granting of status as a non-profit doesn't mean it can't be revoked, such revocation can also (for tax purposes) be antedated. (This entire 'thirdly' is mostly the thoughts of my wife... A CPA who has done tax and nonprofit work.)

Re:How Typical

[/dev/kev]

Which means that any interest that acrues will end up as income to the 'giftfile' organization.

It is possible that any interest earned on a giftfile's balance be given to the giftfile's author, even if the realisticness of this is debatable.

Second off the proponents appear to making the suggestion that their should be multiple gift pools, which makes for a situation ripe with oppurtunities for fraud.

This is true. But it's part of their idea for a decentralised system, and it encourages competition between giftpools to best serve the public.

They claim they are 'grants', but the fact that they are monies earmarked for an individual and payable to that individual on demand moves that claim onto *very* shakey ground.

When I donate to particular charities, I'm often able to say what I want my money to be used for. I'm able to tick boxes which say that I want my money to be used only to help homeless kids, or only to provide aid to foreign countries, or not to be used for administrative costs. Well, in this case, I can "tick a box" which says that my money is to be used to support free software programmers. And there are lots of "boxes", so that I can tick exactly which programmers I think most need the help of my donation. Because the software in question (the software I'm supporting with my donation) is free software, I can argue that it benefits society as a whole since anybody can use it or improve on it. This is in comparison to donating money which ends up going to a homeless kid and helping them sleep somewhere at night. Don't get me wrong, I think that the homeless are a serious social issue, and I have nothing against spending money to help them - but I'm trying to show that the "bank-like" comparison is not necessarily as strong as the "charity-like" one. I can see the benefit in donating to homeless organisations and to free software programmers, but perhaps I can see more direct benefit (personally) in the latter.

Charities distribute money to help people who are less fortunate people, or to help society as a whole. That's what they do. I would say that providing an income to programmers whose work is freely available to anyone in the community is a charitable function, no less than paying the wage of a social worker.

Also, it's worth noting, as another poster has, that the "demand" of the giftfile owner is more of a "request" or "application". Ultimately the giftpool has discretion over where the funds go. However, if a giftpool starts withholding monies from giftfile authors, or otherwise "misbehaving", then donors are free to stop using them and move to another giftpool. I guess the hope is that this would be enough of a deterrant to stop giftpools from doing this sort of thing.

How long before....

[Anonymous Coward]

....two people set up projects with an absolutely useless piece of free IP (like a 52x52 jpg of pure white), and start "donating" equal amounts to each other just for the tax deduction?

Re:How long before....

[gid13]

I don't know about the U.S., but in Canada, technically money received from gifts is taxable. And while that's never really enforced, it probably would be if someone pulled THAT.

Re:How long before....

[gbulmash]

You need to be a 503c non-profit corporation to qualify for donations to you to be tax deductible. It's not easy to qualify for 503c.

Re:How long before....

[/dev/kev]

RTFA. Donations are to "giftpools", which are non-profit organisations. Producers of giftfiles can apply to the giftpool for a "grant" of the amount of donations which have been allocated towards their giftfile. The grant may be subject to taxation, however the donation would be eligible as a deduction. It is, however, futile if you donate $500 to your friend and then claim back $500 in a grant which came from him (via the giftpool). In fact, it's pretty stupid, since the giftpool takes a small amount of the money for their operating costs.

From the last link in the story:

... other participants in the giftfile system make allocations to giftfiles as described above, yet do not produce giftfiles themselves. The way they gain privilege to make allocations is by donating cash to a giftpool. Such donations are tax deductible, because giftpools are nonprofit entities chartered to fund nonproprietary works.

and

Be aware that giftpool grants may need to be declared on your taxes.

finally, a workable alternative to paypal

[wyldeone]

It is nice to have a free alternative to paypal, which forces registration on the user, as well as takes a percentage of what the developer makes.

But I'm REALLY CHEAP !

[MajorDick]

Hey I use a ton of GPL software, I wouldnt PAY for it
Im serious no flamebait, , BUT I also write and contribute software under many free licenses, so THAT my gift back to the "Open Source Movement" if you want to call it that.

I have seen "Free" software that it is almost EXPECTED by the author that he get a "Donation" for it, kinda irks me and usually It gets dumped, If you want to charge for it FINE but dont try and hide it behind the guise of free software then BEG for green.

I wonder how much problme REGULAR donations to EVERYONE involved in now free software would , I dono taint ? them to where they change to only a paid programming model ?

Re:But I'm REALLY CHEAP !

[Anonymous Coward]

> I have seen "Free" software that it is almost EXPECTED by the author that he get a "Donation" for it, kinda irks me and usually It gets dumped, If you want to charge for it FINE but dont try and hide it behind the guise of free software then BEG for green.

Yeah, how dare they encourage people to voluntarily donate to them.. the gall!

There are a lot of projects out there that are very deserving of financial rewards for all their efforts. I think this is one of the downsides to the "Free Software" movement. Too many people think of it in terms of "Free as in my cheap ass doesn't have to pay a dime for it", not in terms of the freedoms Mr. Stallman cares about.

I think if there was a viable mechanism for expecting/getting payments (the vast majority of shareware fails financially) many developers would use it. If it meant better software got produced, and more developers could make a living from it, that would be a very good thing.

The Gift of Vapor

[l0ungeb0y]

After reading their vacuous website it seems that they themselves are collecting donations by means of snail-mail only. Which seems completely laughable on the face of it.

And even if they emerge from vapor-mode and do indeed set up this system, it seems geared torwards institutions rather than individuals as you'd have to use a "gift-pool" ie: a centralized body and set aside fundage into that BEFORE you can assign a portion of those funds to a recipient. And that's not to mention the restrictions placed on those who may contribute their work by requiring contributers to license with a handfull of licenses.

Personally, I think PayPal already covers the online donation territory in a far less political and more trustworthy fashion. Anyone can set up a donation link for any reason whatsoever and collect fundage from the willing. No restrictions on what license is used, what type of media it is or anything else for that matter. And furthermore, you don't have to lock up funds in your paypal account to be able to donate, paypal will transfer from your bank account/credit card automagically.

I think the developers would be wise to reconsider their very niche-centric and restrictive objectives if they are to expect any real usage by both contributors and benefactors.

I don't get it

[Brandybuck]

This system enables producers and supporters of computer files containing nonproprietary intellectual works to participate in a gift economy.

I'm sorry, but I don't get it. Why do I need to "participate" in this "system"? When I post my software on my website under an unenbcumbered license, every and all can come by and grab it. And if I want the unencumbered software of another that has been publicly posted, I can go and grab it. Neither side needs a special system to participate in.

ESR was using a metaphor when we was talking about gift economies in his books. The analogy is not accurate, because computer files are not integral "things". Potlatches were gift economies, because when you give your neighbor a salmon, you had one less for yourself. But when you give your neighbor a copy of your software, you still have it yourself.

Gift economies were based on plentiful resources, but not unlimited resources. (and they also had a strong element of "oneupmanship")

Re:I think I'll donate 1,000 bucks to

[/dev/kev]

Actually, this raises two excellent points which I can't see addressed in the stuff on their website, and are my biggest concerns with the system as I see it at the moment.

First, how to verify that the creator of a giftfile is the "owner" of a work? In other words, what's to stop me from taking the Linux source, making a giftfile for it using my private key, and then distributing the giftfile in an effort to get donations? I can't see anything which prevents behaviour like this.

Presumably the digital signature in the giftfile allows one to verify that a particular work matches a giftfile. That would stop me from putting my giftfile with someone else's work (to try and get people to donate to me instead of the real author), or putting my giftfile with some random crap which I claim is something useful.

Second, how to deal with works which are the result of several authors. In the case of the Linux kernel, there are hundreds of authors, but there can only be one private key to sign the giftfile (I think). Once there are funds donated towards this giftfile, who gets the money? Does it all go to Linus? Or must an organisation (eg. Apache) be setup for every project which has multiple contributors? Or do we have a similar situation to my first point above, where each author makes their own giftfile and then donors have to allocate money to every author? (Or perhaps some sort of grouping system so I can say "split my $10 donation equally among all the authors of linux-2.6.6.tar.bz2"? But I'm not sure how this would fit into their decentralised model...)