How IP Load Balancing Integrates with the Considered Approach

The Considered Approach is the constitution. IP Load Balancing is the IP law that sits under it.


The Big Picture

Your Sustained Universal Economic Prosperity model defines the macro-economics of Liana Banyan:

  1. Three-gear currency differential (Credits / Marks / Joules) for cross-border fairness
  2. Cost+20% margin, positive cash-flow proof, and graduated success-based contribution (“Tab” system)
  3. Commitment-triggered democratic funding, recursive ownership (medallions), distributed manufacturing, and ghost-to-physical pipelines

IP Load Balancing on the Ledger becomes the micro-allocation layer for intellectual property economics inside that macro system.


How They Connect

Considered Approach LayerIP Load Balancing Application
Three-gear currency (Credits/Marks/Joules)All stakes and payouts denominated in Credits; Marks/Joules appear at currency boundaries
Cost+20% marginIP flows don’t destabilize solvency; they redistribute surplus within the external 20% slice
Medallion cascades (spread, don’t concentrate)Patent Buckets + caps + splitting are the IP-domain version of recursive fractional ownership
“Enough is enough” principle$10M per-stake cap operationalizes bounded returns
Democratic fundingBucket participation opens when patents are voted for prosecution
Ghost-to-physical pipelineIP created through platform use flows into the load-balanced system

The Eight Innovations + One

The Considered Approach paper describes eight innovations that form the platform-level toolkit:

  1. Cost+20% pricing model
  2. Three-gear internal currency
  3. Commitment-triggered democratic funding
  4. Tab system for graduated contributions
  5. Medallion cascades for recursive ownership
  6. Distributed manufacturing redundancy
  7. Ghost-to-physical product pipeline
  8. Positive cash-flow proof

IP Load Balancing is the ninth innovation — a domain-specific mechanism that governs how value created by those tools (especially combinatorial IP) is shared over time.


Why This Doesn’t Change the Considered Approach

IP Load Balancing sits on top of the Considered Approach as an application layer, not a revision:

  • The 2025 paper defines the macro rules
  • Load Balancing is one more application of those rules to IP economics
  • Nothing conflicts; the spine is strengthened, not altered

Where Three-Gear Shows Up in IP Load Balancing

Unit of Account

All IP Load Balancing math is done in Credits as the internal unit of account:

  • Global Sponsor units: denominated in Credits
  • Patent Bucket stakes: denominated in Credits
  • Payouts: distributed in Credits

Funding Stakes

When someone acquires an A or C stake:

  1. Determine their purchasing power ratio P(i) vs platform baseline
  2. They choose to buy C Credits worth of stake
  3. Apply three-gear:

If P(i) < 1 (weak-currency):

  • Pay local equivalent of C baseline Credits
  • Receive C Credits of stake
  • Plus Marks = (1 − P(i)) × C (effort-debt to clear through participation)

If P(i) > 1 (strong-currency):

  • Pay local equivalent of C baseline Credits
  • Receive C Credits of stake
  • Plus Joules = (P(i) − 1) × C (stored surplus at acquisition rate)

Distributions

When IP Load Balancing computes a payout:

  • A Pool: Compute 10% A slice in Credits, distribute pro-rata
  • C Buckets: Compute 10% C slice per bucket in Credits, distribute pro-rata

Three-gear kicks in only when moving between Credits and external currency:

  • Credits can be spent on platform
  • Credits can buy more stakes
  • Credits can convert to Joules/Marks under existing rules

Positive Cash-Flow Proof

Adding capped IP flows on top of Cost+20% does not destabilize solvency:

  • IP Load Balancing redistributes surplus within the external 20% slice
  • The 60% platform share and 20% founder share follow the same margin economics
  • Caps and recycling prevent runaway obligations

Behavioral Economics Alignment

Both systems use behavioral economics:

MechanismBehavioral Principle
Marks instead of “discounts”Loss aversion mitigation
Separate currencies (Credits/Marks/Joules)Mental accounting
Separate pools (A vs C buckets)Mental accounting
$10M cap and splitting“Enough is enough” operationalized

Case Study Applications

Let’s Make Dinner

  • Three-gear working: Participants from different currency zones transact at common internal rates
  • IP accumulation: Recipes, logistics systems, brand marks
  • Load Balancing: As IP accumulates around the initiative, it flows through 60/20/20 + bucket logic

$5 Santa

  • Three-gear working: Cross-border gift coordination
  • IP accumulation: Matching algorithms, routing optimization, brand elements
  • Load Balancing: IP from demand-validated features enters the bucket system

Academic Integration

When expanding the IP Load Balancing paper, you can:

In Theoretical Foundations

  • Cite three-gear currency and Tab system as the monetary and cashflow substrate
  • Use positive cash-flow proof to argue: “Adding capped IP flows does not destabilize solvency; it redistributes surplus within the external 20% slice”

In Mechanism Design / Behavioral Section

  • Point out that three-gear framing and bucket rebalancing both use behavioral economics
  • The $10M cap and splitting are direct operationalization of “enough is enough”

In Practical Implementation

  • Reuse Let’s Make Dinner and $5 Santa as live examples of three-gear + IP accumulation + load balancing

Summary

LayerDocumentFunction
Economic ConstitutionConsidered Approach to Universal Sustained ProsperityMacro rules: margin, currency, funding, ownership
IP LawIP Load Balancing on the LedgerDomain-specific allocation for intellectual property
Innovation EngineExponential Innovation Through Combinatorial Framework SynthesisHow new IP is generated and attributed

Together, these three papers form the complete economic and innovation framework for Liana Banyan.


Further Reading


For questions or feedback, contact: Support@LianaBanyan.org