Richness of the digital commons, with Serge Abiteboul and François Bancilhon

Initially, our intention with this book was to focus on the themes of open source, open data and open science. However, we soon realised the value of including the digital commons in our study, by adopting a broader reading of their purpose. Although it is useful to have an operational definition of the commons (a tool for distinguishing what is and what is not part of it), this does not mean we should not look at a broader framework. For example, in the case of data, it is better to know that a data item exists somewhere than not to know. Of course, it is preferable for it to be properly open, even if the community around it still needs to be built before it becomes common knowledge. So we thought it would be a good idea to widen the focus, because the frontiers of the commons are interesting and because the road to becoming a common, above all, is fascinating.

From this perspective, we have attempted a taxonomy of the commons based on the nature of the resources: data, information, knowledge, software, networks. We are also considering another classification based on application domains; we have been surprised by the richness of these domains. The diversity found in the commons is also fascinating: you find this diversity in the communities, in their cultures, their motivations, their governance, their business models and so on. Finally, we can only be impressed by their development over time and space. Many subjects remain to be explored in greater depth, in sociology, economics, law, history… All this diversity leads us to a fascinating question: what determines whether a resource is more appropriate to be a common, a private resource or a public resource? Indeed, the commons are not the only means of organising the production and distribution of digital resources; proprietary software and data managed by the State are another way to do so, and as such must retain their place. 

In a troubled world, where we tend to blame the digital sector for many negative developments, digital commons can provide us with some grounds for optimism. However, we do not believe that the commons are the solution to all the problems posed by digital technology; so let’s not put them in charge of solving all the world’s problems. Still, the communities of commons can be a major asset: they are dynamic and passionate, and they are driven by ethical values that are essential to tackling these issues. Many of these problems cannot be solved by technical solutions, laws and regulations alone. Solutions require the commitment of people in their communities. This is exactly the approach proposed by the commons.

The digital commons tell some wonderful stories, such as those of the Internet, the Web, Wikipedia, open science, free software and so on. These stories demonstrate the astonishing capacity of human communities to succeed, with the help of digital technology, in ventures that previously seemed impossible. Nevertheless, we also note from this study a degree of concern and pessimism about the increasingly violent attempts by private companies and governments to enclose digital commons. More than ever, we need to mobilise to defend the commons.