The commons isn’t something we have, it’s something we do.
The problem with building the digital commons isn’t that people don’t use a variety of open licenses. It’s that they do.
Putting information in the commons doesn’t make sharing happen so much as formally recognize that it’s been happening all along, and encourage others to improve on it.
What’s most important today? To join the physical and digital commons, cooperativism and commons, and do it from the very beginning.
Small producers in all sectors cannot leave the commons and distributed networks aside.
This is part three in my interview with David de Ugarte. Today, I ask: Should participation in the commons be understood as a sacrifice, or rather, does it bring advantages?
Worker cooperativism has to recover the old mutual objectives to be an alternative to the poisonous game of over-scaled capitalism.
The question today is how the old commons, above all those based on work, can take advantage of the opportunity provided by the “new” digital commons.
Like the commons, co-ops are organized around consistent and well-defined principles, and decision-making power is in the hands of the people affected by those decisions. Unlike the commons, however, co-ops are market actors.
If we stop treating news as “intellectual property” that has to be protected and start treating it as a commons that protects us, journalism can regain the respect it deserves.
The democratic and socially conscious nature of co-ops make the knowledge commons a natural fit for us. A co-op is essentially a commons within itself already, and participating in the global knowledge commons is a very fitting next step.