We're announcing a partnership with Tropologic, a company exploring biological approaches to intellectual property management.
This might seem like an unusual partnership for an open-source hardware project. It is. That's why I want to explain what we're doing and why.
The IP Problem in Open Source Hardware
Open source software has solved the intellectual property problem reasonably well. Licenses like GPL, MIT, and Apache provide clear frameworks. Developers understand them. Courts have upheld them.
Open source hardware is messier.
The problem with hardware licenses:
- Patents can cover functional elements that copyright doesn't protect
- Physical designs are easier to copy without attribution
- Manufacturing involves supply chains that don't track licenses
- International enforcement is nearly impossible
When I released the Thiosphere under CERN-OHL-S, I accepted these limitations. Anyone can copy the design. Someone in China could manufacture Thiospheres and sell them without crediting us. There's nothing I can do about it legally.
That's fine — it's the price of open source. But it creates a challenge: how do you build a sustainable project when copying is trivially easy?
What Tropologic Does
Tropologic is experimenting with biological metaphors for IP management.
Traditional IP: Ownership. Exclusion. "This is mine; you can't use it without my permission."
Biological IP: Symbiosis. Ecosystem. "This is shared; using it connects you to a network."
The key insight: in biology, genetic material spreads because it's useful. Organisms that carry beneficial genes thrive. Genes that benefit their hosts propagate more widely.
Tropologic asks: what if intellectual property worked the same way?
Instead of restricting access, you design IP that benefits everyone who uses it. Instead of enforcing exclusion, you create incentives for attribution and contribution.
How This Applies to Thios
Here's what we're exploring with Tropologic:
1. Attribution Incentives
The current system: I ask people to credit Thios when they build. Some do. Many don't. There's no consequence either way.
What we're exploring: making attribution valuable to the builder. What if builders who publicly document their Thiosphere builds get benefits — community recognition, priority support, access to beta designs?
The goal isn't to punish non-attribution. It's to make attribution more attractive than the alternative.
2. Contribution Ecology
Right now, if someone improves the Thiosphere design, they might share it. Or they might not. There's no systemic incentive.
What we're exploring: a contribution ecosystem where improvements flow back automatically. Builders who share modifications get their innovations incorporated into official designs (with credit). Their improvement benefits everyone; they get recognition.
This mirrors how successful genes spread — not through enforcement, but through mutual benefit.
3. Quality Signaling
The open source license means anyone can build and sell a "Thiosphere." Quality varies wildly.
What we're exploring: a reputation layer that helps buyers identify quality builders. Not certification (we're not the certification police), but something like verified reviews, build documentation, and community standing.
Think of it like a biological ecosystem with healthy competition: quality builders thrive because they're visibly better, not because they have exclusive rights.
Early Days
I want to be clear: this is experimental.
We don't have all the answers. Tropologic's approach is novel — there isn't a proven playbook. We're learning together.
The partnership means:
- Regular conversations about IP strategy
- Experiments with different incentive structures
- Shared learning about what works and what doesn't
It doesn't mean:
- We're changing the open source license (we're not)
- We're adding restrictions (we're not)
- This will definitely work (we don't know yet)
Why Announce Now?
I believe in building in public. If we're exploring new approaches to IP management, you should know about it.
Some readers will find this interesting. Some will be skeptical. Both reactions are valid.
My commitment: if this partnership produces useful insights, we'll share them publicly. If it fails, we'll share that too.
The worst outcome would be figuring something out and keeping it secret. That would contradict everything Thios stands for.
Philosophical Alignment
The partnership works because Tropologic and Thios share core beliefs:
Abundance over scarcity: Traditional IP assumes ideas are scarce and must be protected. We believe spreading good ideas creates more value than hoarding them.
Systems over enforcement: Traditional IP relies on legal enforcement. We'd rather build systems where desirable behavior is the natural default.
Experimentation over dogma: Neither of us has The Answer. We're trying things, measuring results, and iterating.
Transparency over secrecy: Both companies operate publicly. Our partnership discussions happen in the open.
What This Means for Builders
If you're building a Thiosphere, here's what changes:
Right now: Nothing.
The designs are still open source. The license is unchanged. You can build, modify, and sell Thiospheres exactly as before.
What we're experimenting with:
- Voluntary attribution programs with community benefits
- Build documentation sharing with recognition
- Quality signals for commercial builders
These are opt-in. They're incentives, not requirements.
What we're NOT doing:
- Adding restrictions to the license
- Requiring registration to build
- Creating a "certified only" builder program
- Charging fees for commercial use
If any of this changes, you'll hear about it here first. Transparency is non-negotiable.
About Tropologic
For those who want to learn more:
Tropologic is a research-stage company exploring biological approaches to complex systems. Their work spans IP management, organizational design, and innovation networks.
They're not a typical consulting firm. They're more like a research lab that works with practitioners (companies like Thios) to test ideas in real contexts.
Their team includes:
- Biologists who study how genetic information spreads
- Lawyers who specialize in IP strategy
- Designers who build incentive systems
- Researchers who measure outcomes
I was introduced to them through mutual contacts in the open source hardware community. We've been talking for about six months before formalizing this partnership.
Learn more at: Tropologic
Questions and Skepticism
I anticipate skepticism. Let me address likely concerns:
"This sounds like you're trying to monetize open source."
Not exactly. I'm trying to make open source sustainable. There's a difference.
The designs stay free. The business model (selling handbooks) stays the same. What we're exploring is whether different incentive structures can make the ecosystem healthier for everyone.
"Biological metaphors sound like corporate buzzwords."
Fair. The language can be pretentious.
Here's the substance: instead of enforcing IP through legal threats, we're exploring incentive design that makes contribution and attribution naturally attractive. Call it whatever you want.
"Why do you need a partner for this?"
I don't need a partner. But Tropologic has thought about these problems more deeply than I have. They bring perspective and frameworks I wouldn't develop on my own.
Also: two organizations learning together is more robust than one organization learning alone.
"Will this actually work?"
Honestly? I don't know. It might not.
But the status quo — open source with no incentive for contribution — has clear limitations. Worth trying something different.
The Invitation
This partnership is an experiment. We're sharing it publicly because that's how we operate.
If you have thoughts — ideas, critiques, references to similar experiments — we want to hear them.
Join the Discord. Send an email. Engage with the ideas.
Open source isn't just open designs. It's open thinking.
Visit Tropologic — Our partner in IP strategy exploration.
Explore Thios designs — Still open source, still free.
Join the community — Where we discuss experiments like this.