3 ms·
This is really weird. It sounds like indentured servitude. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indentured_servant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indentured_servant
by marketer 17y ago
This is really weird. It sounds like indentured servitude.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indentured_servant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indentured_servant
- ricaurte 17y agoThat was the first thing that came to my mind. If someone owns the rights to your future labor, then don't they own a % of you, since you're treating yourself like an LLC?
- tptacek 17y agoThe beneficiary isn't required to work. They're simply required to pay N% of their income and gains if they do.
- patrickas 17y agoReally! How so? From that wikipedia page: " An indentured servant is a laborer under contract to an employer for a fixed period of time,[...], in exchange for their transportation, food, clothing, lodging and other necessities. " Here you are paying a fixed sum of money that they can use for whatever they want (instead of the minimum necessities like food and clothing) and you are not the employer, the person can work on anything they like as long as they pay back the dividend. I don't see what makes the two cases similar. In one case you pay the minimum so they work for you. In the other you pay some amount so they can work whatever they want but you get a percentage of that.
- hyperbovine 17y agoWell, so does the alternative. (Read the post)