[p2p-research] Am I missing any commons?

[Patrick Anderson]

Ryan Lanham wrote:
> Ovens, tractors, etc. really more co-ops or communes.  A commons isn't a
> commune.  The point of a commune is community ownership.

After looking through the list of Common 'types' I found something
that sounds quite a lot like what I was imagining for using Private
Property in a GNU way:

http://P2PFoundation.net/Common_Property_Regime

"'
In common property regimes there is no free access to the resource and
common-pool resources are not public goods. While there is relatively
free but monitored access to the resource system for community
members, there are mechanisms in place which allow the community to
exclude outsiders from using its resource. Thus, in a common property
regime, a common-pool resource has the appearance of a private good
from the outside and that of a common good from the point of view of
an insider. The resource units withdrawn from the system are typically
owned individually by the appropriators.
'"

> You can't put your sweater into a commons.  It is a limited resource.

So is land, water, fish, seeds, air, etc.  We had better start
treating these as the finite resources they are!