Advantages and Benefits

The potential benefits of the so-called "network effects" of distributed systems are now common knowledge thanks to the Internet.  However, there are a number of special advantages of including compatible corporations into the architecture for a distributed trust network.  For example:

• True common properties -- Removing shareholders from the ownership equation creates the possibility for a community of participants jointly owning assets -- software, patents, trademarks, infrastructure -- and then having complete freedom regarding how those assets are made available within the community and to the general public.  A non-stock membership corporation, where ownership is held in the form of rights of participation, is perhaps just one of many possible approaches.  It is, however, well-tested in the commercial world, most notably with Visa International.

• Unlimited scale -- The system is designed to allow any number of participants.  The infrastructure to allow this may not be fully in place yet, but there is nothing about its architecture that stands in the way of explosive growth.

• Fiduciaries for the system -- The importance of having a group of trustees with a legal, fiduciary duty to the health of a system cannot be overstated.  It not only gives more comfort to those considering the contribution of an asset intended for broad benefit to the community or public, it also perpetuates that responsibility institutionally, allowing it to adapt to the changing political and economic landscape. The suggested system architecture does not only have fiduciaries, it multiplies them with the addition of every new related corporation.

• Multiple ownership strategies -- Every related corporation can take one or more different approaches with how it makes its assets available to members or the public, as long as it is consistent with inherited member agreements.  This turns out not to be much of a restriction.  For example, as far as we can tell, a related corporation could adopt any of the major open source license agreements as its way of "owning" its software assets. But it could also create a similar license, and make its terms only available to members.  This decreases the pool of potential contributors, but it may increase the value of becoming a member.  All of these ownership approaches can be simultaneously available within the Identity Commons.  While every related corporation may want to choose one approach over another, the system as a whole doesn't take sides.

• Multiple business strategies -- Different ownership patterns allows for different business strategies, also occurring side by side. This applies not only to the related corporations that directly make up the commons, but to all members, who will have a far richer set of potential strategies to pursue. A full spectrum between open source and proprietary business models opens up.

• One wins, all win -- This may be the most powerful economic incentive of all. The result of multiple ownership and business strategies coupled with open and interoperable business systems, is that if any winning strategy is found it is likely to quickly draw the participation of many other members.  If the Visa experience is any indication, it is likely that several winning strategies will be found, added to, and replaced in an ongoing evolution of value creation.

• Governance -- This is usually a dirty word for anyone who has ever had the experience of being "governed." In a fast evolving system, however, where everyone is depending on everyone else following the agreed upon rules, it can be a great relief to have a system that can rapidly make decisions and have the authority to enforce them.  That the power of any collective authority is severely restricted by purpose and principles (and contract!) is an enormous advantage, as is having lots and lots of fiduciaries watch-dogging it.  But nothing replaces good, old-fashioned diligence, too.  (Just in case old habits die hard...)

• Principled internal arbitration -- Part of the basic member agreement will be to settle everything short of criminal activity inside the system.  Besides limiting liability, it also ensures that the arbitration is based on the purpose and principles -- as the community has come to understand them -- and not at the discretion of a judge that has not witnessed the subtleties of distributed systems.

• All things to all people -- Perhaps this is a bit of an overstatement, but not by much. Members have the right to construct a setting that matches their personal and professional viewpoints.  And the diversity of these viewpoints will almost certainly create rich opportunities for anyone who is interested in controlling and exchanging their data.

• Trust -- No one can force anyone else to trust.  But we believe if we allow people to follow their own instincts, business and otherwise, work with whom and how they want, and not allow the system to absorb any more authority from them than is absolutely necessary, then the conditions for building a truly trust-worthy system will be met.

(Continue to Getting Involved)

(Back to Intro)