Boyle: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: '''Jamie Boyle, Defining the Commons''' ''A rough attempt at a definition of a commons: a resource arranged such that, unlike property all members of a relevant population have access to...) |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{TOCright}} | |||
=Jamie Boyle, Defining the Commons= | |||
''A rough attempt at a definition of a commons: a resource arranged such that, unlike property all members of a relevant population have access to that property free from the will of others. Unlike the public domain, commons (1) have defined user populations, and (2) have set rules for use. However, our definition of the commons is inherently malleable, and will always reflect our desires for it.'' | ''A rough attempt at a definition of a commons: a resource arranged such that, unlike property all members of a relevant population have access to that property free from the will of others. Unlike the public domain, commons (1) have defined user populations, and (2) have set rules for use. However, our definition of the commons is inherently malleable, and will always reflect our desires for it.'' | ||
==Commons is a resource accessible to a ''relevant population''== | |||
* definitions of the commons varies on how large the population who has access rights has to be | * definitions of the commons varies on how large the population who has access rights has to be | ||
* commons is a resource to which a certain population has access and use rights (key difference from public domain) | * commons is a resource to which a certain population has access and use rights (key difference from public domain) | ||
| Line 12: | Line 10: | ||
* implicit: commons can exist relative to a given population. What is commons for one group may not be commons for those outside the group | * implicit: commons can exist relative to a given population. What is commons for one group may not be commons for those outside the group | ||
==Commons defined by ''restrictions on use''== | |||
* Unlike resources in the public domain, resources in the commons may have restrictions attached to their use | * Unlike resources in the public domain, resources in the commons may have restrictions attached to their use | ||
* Not simply the opposite of property | * Not simply the opposite of property | ||
| Line 19: | Line 16: | ||
* commons are defined by certain restraints (another key difference from private property) | * commons are defined by certain restraints (another key difference from private property) | ||
==Commons can ''exist upon'' private property'== | |||
* intellectual property can be used to sustain private property | * intellectual property can be used to sustain private property | ||
* Commons resources operate outside of market conditions | * Commons resources operate outside of market conditions | ||
| Line 26: | Line 22: | ||
* can create a commons using existing IP rights | * can create a commons using existing IP rights | ||
==Common can ''interact with'', or ''increase the value of'', private property== | |||
* commons property can interact with and increase the value of private property | * commons property can interact with and increase the value of private property | ||
* Until recently, intellectual property was taken to be the exception, not the rule | * Until recently, intellectual property was taken to be the exception, not the rule | ||
==Commons' norms can be ''self-sustaining''== | |||
* Commons can allow people to take from a common pool. Sometimes require that the resulting product is fed back into the pool. | * Commons can allow people to take from a common pool. Sometimes require that the resulting product is fed back into the pool. | ||
==Creating commons from existing property requires ''collective permission''== | |||
* commons can be created from the collective permission of rights-holders | * commons can be created from the collective permission of rights-holders | ||
==Definition of the commons is ''inherently malleable''== | |||
* Our definition of the public domain will evolve according to our hopes for it | * Our definition of the public domain will evolve according to our hopes for it | ||
==Freedom of the commons is ''freedom from the will of others''== | |||
* Two different kinds of freedom: (1) freedom from the will of others, versus (2) freedom from a background of economic constraints. Boyle prefers (1) | * Two different kinds of freedom: (1) freedom from the will of others, versus (2) freedom from a background of economic constraints. Boyle prefers (1) | ||
==Commons can be simply ''standard practices''== | |||
* Sometimes the commons might not be a resource but just a standard for communication | * Sometimes the commons might not be a resource but just a standard for communication | ||
=Navigation= | |||
[[Defining the Commons]] | Back to [[Defining the Commons]]<br> | ||
Back to [[Industrial Cooperation Project]]<br> | |||
Back to [[Main Page]] | |||
[[ | |||
[[Main Page]] | |||
Latest revision as of 18:08, 19 May 2010
Jamie Boyle, Defining the Commons
A rough attempt at a definition of a commons: a resource arranged such that, unlike property all members of a relevant population have access to that property free from the will of others. Unlike the public domain, commons (1) have defined user populations, and (2) have set rules for use. However, our definition of the commons is inherently malleable, and will always reflect our desires for it.
Commons is a resource accessible to a relevant population
- definitions of the commons varies on how large the population who has access rights has to be
- commons is a resource to which a certain population has access and use rights (key difference from public domain)
- something is truly a commons only if the whole society has access rights to the resource
- implicit: commons can exist relative to a given population. What is commons for one group may not be commons for those outside the group
Commons defined by restrictions on use
- Unlike resources in the public domain, resources in the commons may have restrictions attached to their use
- Not simply the opposite of property
- commons usually require a framework of norms or rules to operate
- commons are defined by certain restraints (another key difference from private property)
Commons can exist upon private property'
- intellectual property can be used to sustain private property
- Commons resources operate outside of market conditions
- commons can be built on a foundation of private property
- can create a commons using existing IP rights
Common can interact with, or increase the value of, private property
- commons property can interact with and increase the value of private property
- Until recently, intellectual property was taken to be the exception, not the rule
Commons' norms can be self-sustaining
- Commons can allow people to take from a common pool. Sometimes require that the resulting product is fed back into the pool.
Creating commons from existing property requires collective permission
- commons can be created from the collective permission of rights-holders
Definition of the commons is inherently malleable
- Our definition of the public domain will evolve according to our hopes for it
Freedom of the commons is freedom from the will of others
- Two different kinds of freedom: (1) freedom from the will of others, versus (2) freedom from a background of economic constraints. Boyle prefers (1)
Commons can be simply standard practices
- Sometimes the commons might not be a resource but just a standard for communication
Back to Defining the Commons
Back to Industrial Cooperation Project
Back to Main Page