The FAQ says:
To start, we will be focused on education, support, and advocating on behalf of online creators. In the future this may evolve, but we will not currently provide negotiated rates, work rules, health & worker’s comp insurance, etc. However, if you have any idea for something we should do, let us know!
The website footer unfortunately includes “© Internet Creators Guild” unmitigated by any license, though the terms intriguingly include (emphasis added):
Internet Creators Guild is not a law firm, does not provide legal advice, and is not a substitute for a law firm. Sending us an email or using any of the Services, including the licenses, public domain tools, and choosers, does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship.
I suspect ICG may be considerably more commons-friendly than otherwise would have been the case due to Hank Green’s involvement and familiarity with CC-BY, but mostly in the form of providing information and options. I gather that the main concerns of YouTubers and other creators ICG is likely to reach have to do with very weak negotiating position with potential sponsors due to vast oversupply coupled with lack of knowledge and support concerning legal matters and fallout from such, e.g., burnout, inauthenticity, and angry fans; I’d expect these sort of issues to dominate ICG. But I don’t really know what this demographic thinks about copyright and commons, in terms of any of beliefs, values, interests, or politics. I hope for the best!
Organizations that seem to me somewhat similar in spirit and background, in different fields are CASH Music and Authors Alliance. Or, older and less commons-friendly but not completely hostile, Future of Music Coalition. I don’t recall anything in this vein for software. The League for Programming Freedom is much older and narrowly focused (on software patents). Perhaps recently-announced ContractPatch.
I’m more excited about organizing knowledge producers whose practice is commons-based and knowledge consumers (especially funders, from patrons to purchasers to taxpayers) for commons-favoring practice and policy, but I admit the mass of creators are politically important; any entities aligned with helping them that are at least somewhat commons-friendly are probably a big plus.