Internationalisation & decentralization

Being able to adapt to local legal specificities

Being able to share datasets (registers of authors or commons)

Have a decentralized information architecture

Why anticipating an international approach?

The constraints of the production of digital commons

• Digital commons can be developed anywhere in the world.
• The commoners contributing to the same common can themselves be based in different countries.
• The financial contributors to the commons can also be based in different countries.
• An OGC is necessarily legally based in a country, the legal status of an OGC can therefore be different from one country to another (foundation, trust, association, trust, etc.).
• An OGC does not necessarily have the vocation - or the capacity - to deal with all of the commons at the global level, it is more realistic to envisage that an OGC has a precise territorial and/or sectoral anchoring.

It is therefore necessary that all CMOs throughout the world can share common registers to avoid duplication and legal inconsistencies: register of commons, register of commoners, amounts of financial contributions, allocation of sums towards the commons and the commoners...

Decentralized architecture

• It would be possible - or even more realistic - to have several OGCs distributed throughout the world, and/or different OGCs "specialized" in certain verticals (industrial sector, programming language, etc.)

• For such a system to operate on an international scale, the information infrastructure must be shared, while allowing each OGC to manage its own corpus.

• Technically it would be possible to offer all OGCs a free digital management tool based on ActivityPods in order to be able to both decentralize data storage, while allowing each instance to manage its own datasets.

Principle diagram