FREED (The flove of gifting)
Gifts are ways to improve human relations with materialities very deeply because they leverage the exchanging we tend to overrate in our livings.
Gifts are not really gifts if there is not a receiver that welcomes it. Gifts are as valueable as the receiver wants it, and are also very valueable if the giver has a few of them.
Gifts can be given for the exclusive use of one person. The receiver could also suspect that the gift implies a debt to the giver and refuse the gifting because of that. These kind of clauses make the offer action to be closer to a lending or an exchange than to a gift, and this is a problem we are having in the gifting.
When we gift something we tend to still expect something in return while we also should expect the receiver to do as (s)he wishes with the gift.
Digital things can be so abundant that the gifting of it to someone doesn’t imped gifting the same thing to another person. The public domain works quite well for these kind of abundant resources, where the former owner still retain the moral rights over the thing. The moral rights of copyright law are still useable by the former owner in the ambiguous case of reputational damages made to the original author with the modification of the original thing. When we want to use the public domain for more material and scarce things, what we are technically doing is transfering the property rights to the State.
Gifts that are donated with the wish to be further shared (majority of formal gifts) deserve to be specially cared, so we can work out in a system that helps you find the more ideal person for receiving such a gift, hence myfreedom pool initiative for receiving and routing freed offers.
Freed model proposes a lovely way for gifting that tackles the ambiguities of property management after gifting. By gifting freed you declare empty your property rights over the thing, even you promising not to use your moral rights over the thing.
Freed model offers you pre-loaded declarations for gifting. It also allows you to estate other non binding wishes for the future use of thing. Both of these actions can only work informally and or within a network that discourages the appeal to property formalities that will still rule (we can’t do above what the law estates).
Freed initiatives set up very wild cases about the possible uses of things. First of all, you are the one responsible of selecting an audience for your offer. All recipients of the offer will be possible propietaries of it. You could keep it private between you, but you can’t blame anyone for having advertised it either.
You would have to mind this specially and from the beginning because, actually, the first one in showing interest in it or going to get it (as you informally prefer…) will be the next legitimated owner of it. As a owner he could formally – legally cancel your license and don’t let anyone else use it anymore. In the other side of things, informally, (s)he risks having the same problem when (s)he will be lending it to another person. Technically, that offer wouldn’t be a lending and the offeror could not imped the requester to use it, it would be a property full transfer instead.
If you or your requester were to not comply with the estated wishes from the original offeror, (s)he couldn’t blame you for that, (s)he rather should keep you apart of future freed offers (s)he would make, if (s)he wants to act against your interests.
MyFreedom is a proposed common pool for receiving and managing freed gifts.
Freed chain is for traceable acknowledgements of freed donations