New concept: Enforcement Network (contingency-incentivized violation enforcement)

Introduces specs/EnforcementNetworkConcept.md: independent, locally-licensed
Enforcement Partners pursue unauthorized Commercial Use (License §3
violations) in their home jurisdiction for a Contingency Share of Recovery,
so enforcement scales the way the framework's monetization already does -
through aligned incentive rather than central litigation capacity. New
terminology (Alleged Violation, Enforcement Action, Recovery, Contingency
Share, Platform Share, Enforcement Registry, Enforcement Partner Agreement)
plus a proposed enforcement-recovery Monetization Extension so Recovery
flows into Development Credit through the existing accounting model rather
than a parallel bucket.

Flags the mechanism's central risk up front rather than assuming it away:
lawyer contingency fees are not legal everywhere. Backed by
workplans/TREV-WP-0005-enforcement-network-research.md (10 tasks); four
executed this session with live web research:

- Germany/EU: RVG §4a permits contingency fees only in three narrow gates,
  none fitting this fact pattern well - single-role Enforcement Partner is
  very likely not viable; France permits a fixed-fee-plus-uncapped-result-
  fee structure instead; EU litigation-funding regulation is proposed
  (2022 EP resolution) but not yet adopted.
- US: contingency fees broadly permitted; practical precondition is timely
  copyright registration of the Milestone Release to unlock statutory
  damages/fee-shifting; Copyright Claims Board flagged as a lower-cost venue.
- UK: Damages-Based Agreements cap fees at 50% for this case category -
  the concept's originally-proposed 50% Contingency Share lands exactly on
  this real statutory ceiling, the first jurisdiction where the figure is
  precisely validated rather than arbitrary.
- Mechanism design: synthesizes the above into a single Enforcement Partner
  Agreement template with jurisdiction-conditional role structure
  (single-role vs. Litigation Funder/Local Counsel split), with a payment-
  flow diagram showing the Development Credit allocation is unaffected by
  which structure applies.

Six of ten WP-0005 tasks remain open (Argentina, India, China, Africa,
Asia-Pacific, and the human-gated synthesis). Cross-referenced from README.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

README.md

@@ -47,6 +47,10 @@ Extracted and stabilized from the concept draft under `workplans/TREV-WP-0003-no
 
 [`specs/TargetRevenueCommercialUseAgreement-V1C1.md`](specs/TargetRevenueCommercialUseAgreement-V1C1.md) is the companion Commercial Use Agreement template the License refers to but does not itself set terms for — same preliminary-candidate status, but **less** mature than the License: it had no dedicated prior-art research pass, and its Section 13 (Indemnification) is deliberately left unwritten rather than guessed.
 
+## Enforcement Network concept
+
+[`specs/EnforcementNetworkConcept.md`](specs/EnforcementNetworkConcept.md) is a new, separate concept (2026-07-29): independent, locally-licensed Enforcement Partners pursue unauthorized Commercial Use in their home jurisdiction for a share of Recovery, so License §3 enforcement scales without the Licensor litigating everywhere directly. **The central open risk is that lawyer contingency fees are not legal everywhere** — Germany notably restricts them — so the concept requires a jurisdiction-conditional Litigation Funder/Local Counsel structure, not a single global fee mechanism. Backed by `workplans/TREV-WP-0005-enforcement-network-research.md`; four of ten research tasks are done (Germany/EU, US, UK, mechanism design — see `history/260729-TREN-*.md`), confirming the UK's 50% Damages-Based Agreement cap validates the originally-proposed Contingency Share exactly, while Germany likely requires the split-role structure.
+
 ## Repository layout
 
 | Path | Role |
@@ -71,6 +75,7 @@ Extracted and stabilized from the concept draft under `workplans/TREV-WP-0003-no
 | [TREV-WP-0002](workplans/TREV-WP-0002-trust-service-foundation.md) | Schemas, pure Outstanding Target fold, golden fixture — **finished** |
 | [TREV-WP-0003](workplans/TREV-WP-0003-normative-core-extraction.md) | Extract stable normative core docs — T01–T05 done, T06 human review open |
 | [TREV-WP-0004](workplans/TREV-WP-0004-global-jurisdiction-research.md) | Global jurisdictional research backing the License/CUA candidates (Germany/EU, US, UK, Argentina, India, China, Africa, Asia-Pacific, choice-of-law) — planned, not started |
+| [TREV-WP-0005](workplans/TREV-WP-0005-enforcement-network-research.md) | Enforcement Network legal feasibility research (contingency-fee availability per jurisdiction) — 4 of 10 tasks done |
 
 Hub index: [`WORK-RECORDS.md`](WORK-RECORDS.md) · brief: [`.custodian-brief.md`](.custodian-brief.md)