[gt_]

Interesting. So you would have one person with 3 business entities; one for the “mode of production” (technology assets), one for the “means of production” (revenue and monetary assets), and one for the “relations of production” (customer facing presence). Having studied a little bit of Karl Marx in school, I just can’t help but recognize the congruencies between your solution and his theory of Modes, Means, and Relations of Production. It’s quite profound in the context of high-tech modes and patents as an override for securing them. The “modes” are one of the hardest to grasp. He asserted they are the exterior elements like lifestyles, infrastructure, and processes that capitalism would depend on but not account for, and conveniently replace at will, at an accelerating rate. Orthogonality certainly sounds like the way to go if you can manage it.

Anyhow, sorry I don’t have the legal info you’re after. I wishe you luck.

[YPCrumble]

What work are you referring to?

[gt_]

Yeah fair question; hopefully my answer suffices. These three concepts are kind of a constant in his later economic work. I don’t know if he ever presented them in such a succinct way himself; I think listing them like I did was done by somebody else later on. I could be wrong.

I am most familiar with Das Kapital. The ‘means’ are a big part of Volume I, more so as it progresses if I remember right, and his main focus in that volume is the capitalist mode, which prioritizes the means. Volume III (written by Engels) goes deeper into the wider system of modes; elaborating on how modes function in general, and this is where the acceleration concept is asserted more formally.

I am no economist and maybe that’s why but I find the modes discussion in Volume III the most interesting, whether his economic stuff is correct or not, his breakdown of modes seems almost more like anthropology. I mean, I don’t know how people would ever understand us in the future without understanding this in some form or another.