Close WP-0004/WP-0005 with alpha/beta legal-review deferral

Maintainer decision (2026-07-29): full specialist legal review of the
TRSL/CUA is postponed until the framework moves out of beta, given
limited legal/commercial exposure during build/alpha. WP-0004-T10 and
WP-0005-T10 synthesize their jurisdiction research into adopted alpha/beta
working defaults (governing law -> arbitration at a neutral seat,
liability cap, data protection minimal-collection practice, and the
Enforcement Network's fee mechanics) rather than full resolution, and are
accepted on that basis. Propagates the decision to the License/CUA V1C1
Appendix A tables and status banners, SCOPE.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, the
WP-0008-T05 go-live gate, and README.md.
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-07-29 20:46:49 +02:00
parent 4d2e1e5153
commit d07c77f40a
11 changed files with 190 additions and 30 deletions

View file

@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ Extracted and stabilized from the concept draft under `workplans/TREV-WP-0003-no
## 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`; 9 of 10 tasks are done (all 8 jurisdictions plus mechanism design — see `history/260729-TREN-*.md`), only the human-gated synthesis remains. Findings: 50% is only exactly valid in the UK; most jurisdictions cap lower (1835%) or ban direct lawyer contingency outright (Germany, India); India cleanly confirms the split-role model is both necessary and legal there; Japan's fee-splitting rule means even the split-role fallback needs jurisdiction-specific structuring, not just an availability check.
[`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`, now **finished** (all 8 jurisdictions plus mechanism design and the human-gated synthesis, accepted 2026-07-29 — see `history/260729-TREN-*.md`). Findings: 50% is only exactly valid in the UK; most jurisdictions cap lower (1835%) or ban direct lawyer contingency outright (Germany, India); India cleanly confirms the split-role model is both necessary and legal there; Japan's fee-splitting rule means even the split-role fallback needs jurisdiction-specific structuring, not just an availability check.
The concept's §13 now defines a **Global Contingency Share Determination Rule**, sequential rather than a "pick the higher number" calculation: (1) 50% where an outcome-contingent fee is lawful at that level; (2) else the jurisdiction's own lower lawful cap; (3) else — where no outcome-contingent fee is lawful at all (Germany, India) — **no Contingency Share**, and instead a non-contingent **Standard Financing Amount** (a fixed sum, paid regardless of outcome, defaulting to $1,000 local-currency-equivalent, recalculated annually, announced by 31 July for the following 1 January) toward the cost of bringing the case. Because it doesn't depend on winning, it isn't a contingent fee at all — a deliberate fix after an earlier draft's "fixed bounty" framing was still outcome-contingent (paid only on success) and so would not have escaped prohibitions like India's Rule 20 ("a fee contingent on the results of litigation"). §13.0 also makes explicit that none of this creates a right to sue — pressing charges remains exclusively the Licensor's decision; the rule only makes a ready, low-friction default available once that decision is made.
@ -76,8 +76,8 @@ The concept's §13 now defines a **Global Contingency Share Determination Rule**
| [TREV-WP-0001](workplans/TREV-WP-0001-license-prior-art-research.md) | Prior-art research → TRSL V1C1 license candidate — **finished**, accepted by the maintainer 2026-07-29 |
| [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 — **finished**, reviewed and accepted 2026-07-29 |
| [TREV-WP-0004](workplans/TREV-WP-0004-global-jurisdiction-research.md) | Global jurisdictional research backing the License/CUA candidates — 9 of 10 tasks done; only the human-gated T10 synthesis remains |
| [TREV-WP-0005](workplans/TREV-WP-0005-enforcement-network-research.md) | Enforcement Network legal feasibility research — 9 of 10 tasks done (all jurisdictions and mechanism design; T10 synthesis remains, human-gated) |
| [TREV-WP-0004](workplans/TREV-WP-0004-global-jurisdiction-research.md) | Global jurisdictional research backing the License/CUA candidates — **finished**, T10 synthesis accepted 2026-07-29 with alpha/beta working defaults (full legal review deferred until out of beta — see `SCOPE.md` §1) |
| [TREV-WP-0005](workplans/TREV-WP-0005-enforcement-network-research.md) | Enforcement Network legal feasibility research — **finished**, T10 synthesis accepted 2026-07-29 on the same alpha/beta basis (Japan's Article 12 risk remains explicitly unresolved) |
| [TREV-WP-0006](workplans/TREV-WP-0006-trust-service-implementation.md) | Hosted Trust Service reference implementation (PRD Phase 4b) — active, not yet started |
| [TREV-WP-0007](workplans/TREV-WP-0007-degeneration-policy-and-canonical-profiles.md) | Degeneration policy + canonical monetization profile catalog — active, not yet started |
| [TREV-WP-0008](workplans/TREV-WP-0008-governance-and-pilot-rollout.md) | Governance formalization + pilot rollout across `coulomb-loop`/`net-kingdom`/`helix-forge`/`railiance-*` — active, not yet started; real Phase declarations gated behind T05 |