FAQs

From PPP

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Public private is contradictory, isn't it?

Yes & no. Basically, defining a Public use of something is making it not really public. 2 examples:

  1. The GNU General Public License is even more contradictory because the Licensing text is an unmodifiable text privately owned by the Free Software Foundation which also gets some exclusive co-owner rights on the good.
  2. Most of the Public services-goods you have in your country are just public for Country's passport holders and maybe are not as Public as advertised because other reasons.

Therefore, the first P at PPP is just yet another redefining effort for Public. Another relatively unconsistent aproach, you know...

The PPP recomended declarations are recomendations and also ppp.org site's contents are on the public domain.


[edit] Public vs Free...

Public(as in PPP) includes "Free as in freedom", "Free as in beer" and "Free as in available".

If you want to suggest Social, please don't because is much more ambiguos...


[edit] Why not Licenses and/or Contracts instead of (informal)Declarations?

With licenses you'll need to estate copyright holder(s) of those. They would make your Property not completely private since the copyright holder will be automatically a Co-owner of your Property.

With Contracts you(owner) have to establish a Period(time) where you are giving away your Co-use preference to someone else. You also need to overformalize agreements if you are really looking for that aparent legal consistency.


[edit] So, what is and what is not Public?

When you are declaring a thing PPP you are welcoming all Humans&Animals to co-use it. Global audience, no restictions per type of people. If you don't feel confident about it, you can:

  1. Use the most restrictive clausules for your declaration.
  2. Advertise it (offline&) just to some people from your town/city
  3. Declare it a (global)Communitary property.
  4. Remember that with the PPP recommended declarations you can ask some unwished co-user to stop co-using your thing or threat him about (legally) sueing him/her with robbery charges if (s)he doesn't obbey you.

Some clausules like...:

  1. "You can pass it to a friend of yours", but not to a friend of a friend of yours
  2. Co-using preference...

...Had to be moved from the PPP into the Communitary property realm because of that.


[edit] Why should i declare my goods PPP?

For maximizing your resources. With every person that co-use a not-in-use-otherwise thing from you are getting private benefits....


[edit] How to declare my goods PPP?

Just say "This is PPP". At PPP.org you can find tools for saying it louder...


[edit] What can i do if the co-users return in bad conditions the PPP?

First we should make the difference between "The PPP Car hasn't got the tyres as when i declared it PPP" from "It was your fault in the Car crashing and now my insurance is going to grow, you should pay me the difference".

It's firstly recommended to "Refuse compensation per (sustainable) co-use" for avoiding other burocratic clausules. 

By the owner declaring that is refusing to compensation per co-use, he/she is not automatically refusing compensations per accidental damages done by co-users.
which have to be compensated without the owner having to estate the valorative standards. That's why is recommended to add witnesses which will be the ones 
deciding who is right or not in case of a dispute.

However, if you are very afraid of that someday happening and that is sttoping you to PPP, you can:

  1. Ask the co-user to compensate the damage by repairing it or by giving you back another equivalent thing.

And if he/she/it refuses you can:

  1. Notify to the closest PPP contact you have had this problem.
  2. Use the PPP2
  3. Use some Communitary property declaration.
  4. Sue the co-user in a conventional court/police station (although it's not recommended)


[edit] What would PPP.org do in that case?

The person who don't compensate a damage or the person who makes false acusations about unsocial behaviours will be excluded from the co-using rights given in the PPP declarations, so it can be considered as a thief if he/she goes using any other PPP unless the owner especifies another conditions for the person outside the PPP framework.


[edit] Which unwanted burocracies do you refer to?

If we don't add ?I refuse compensation per co-use' we'd have to include conditions like:

  1. This PPP is granted to be in perfect condition by XXXXcentralised certifier orgs' list
  2. (In a PPP Car) Per each kilometre, You should Compensate:
    1. 0.0009% of the Tyres
    2. 0.0008% of the Engine
    3. ...

In the same standards as shown (not in $).

It's unwanted even having to estate an objective sustainable line, see:

  1. ...
  2. It will be a non-sustainable co-use if the co-use implies a loose of more than:
    1. 0.0009% of the Tyres
    2. 0.0008% of the Engine
    3. ...

Which if so, has to be compensated by the co-user to the owner in X.XXXhours per 0.001% of extra damage.

PPP tries to grant security and sustainability by recommending the clausules 'Co-users must have declared some PPP', 'Resultant production has to be PPP', by the universal acces to co-using, by the owner keeping always the authority on the PPP, by keeping a decentralised and centralised consultable blacklisted people database(s), by recommending to add back@publicprivateproperty.org as a co-owner, etc.

Retrieved from "http://www.publicprivateproperty.org/wiki/FAQs"
Personal tools