The difficulty lies in framing that relationship between Subject (“owner/user”) and Object (“owned/used”) in a protocol. Up until now the Property relationship has been irretrievably broken as between absolute/ permanent “ownership” and temporary (for a defined period)”use”.

I observe a new possibility of indefinite use, which I term “open capital”. The enabler of this is a consensual (two way) “Open Corporate” protocol acting as a form of legal XML (“Law is Code), and bringing together disparate legal persons (individual or corporate) and jurisdictions, rather than disparate hardware and software.

I am – like you, I think – proposing a networked partnership of partnerships, or cooperative of cooperatives: there is no “Profit” and no “Loss” within a partnership – merely a mutual creation and exchange of value in its myriad forms.

ie I propose a market, but a market without profit, and without “rentiers”.

My second point is that these protocols – “Open Corporates” as I think of them – essentially allow us to transcend the alienating “Organisation” (“Them” as opposed to “Us”) whether it be Company, State or Institution.

I see the future in Open Corporate “frameworks” therefore, within which individuals “self organise”, and one of the key stakeholders within these frameworks is the “Steward” or “Custodian” of both the “Property” in use (which may be virtual eg IP) and of the “Aims” or “Purpose” of those who share the “use value” of this property.

And one of the key points is, in relation to Commons, such as Land or Knowledge is that those who have exclusive use of such Commons should compensate those they exclude.

Such a levy or tax on privilege could form the basis of a more rational and equitable Society.

What if property were considered owned by everyone? Buckminster Fuller’s spaceship earth? If we’re all in this spaceship, don’t we essentially all have a stake? If we all do, then we’re all trustees of the Earth as well. We should be charging ourselves rent. We should be charging ourselves for how we use Earth.

That brings to mind the proposals of Silvio Gesell made in the early part of the last century, and available on line in his “Natural Economic Order”. Gesell said property should be community based and should be used on a long-term rental basis, with conditions that ensure eco-compatible use.

Gesell also made an interesting proposal on money, which would reinforce that concept by charging a fee (now called demurrage) on all money outstanding, which would then serve to be able to re-distribute buying power to all on a per-head equal basis. This way, the charge would majorly weigh on those with the most activity using and consequently keeping around the largest amounts of money, meaning the major users of our natural resources would tend to pay most, and the benefit would be equally available to all.

If this could be combined with an electronic currency (see Open Money or Ripple) and your idea of a functional, open source, easy to use method of internet-based payment, I could imagine it would have a chance of taking off.