Decision
Network-level revenue — API access, AI/data licensing, Fact graph licensing, marketplace fees, Network-wide subscriptions — flows through a transparent waterfall:
- Network infrastructure & operating costs — hosting, bandwidth, T&S operations, baseline platform staff
- R&D pool — funding future platform capability, never "growth at all costs," governed by Council
- Franchise distribution — a portion routes to Franchises to reduce their per-Franchise cost burden, enabling Franchises to choose ad-free operation if they wish
- Excess — handled per the Need-vs-Greed constitutional rule (excess revenue triggers reduced platform fees, lower ad caps, or expanded contributor compensation pool — not extracted as profit)
Reasoning
Centralize the highest-leverage revenue stream where it does structural good. AI/data licensing is potentially OLN's biggest revenue line and uniquely well-suited to Network-level negotiation. Routing it through Network operations first means infrastructure is always paid before any extraction is even possible.
Reduce Franchise-level pressure to monetize. A Franchise that receives some Network distribution can credibly run zero ads and still pay its share. This decouples ad density from financial necessity.
Avoid the Reddit pattern. Reddit struck major AI licensing deals; Reddit kept the money. Contributors received nothing. The waterfall structurally prevents this.
Open questions (deferred to constitutional drafting)
- Specific percentages at each waterfall stage
- Whether Franchise distribution is uniform or proportional (by traffic, contributor count, or some other signal)
- Free-rider question: should a Franchise that also runs no membership/sponsorship still receive Network distribution
- R&D pool governance — Council-only? Community proposals? Annual budget?