The beginning of it all, to me, is the fundamental recognition of property forms. The Romans in the ancient times, recognised three forms of property: res privatae, res publicae, and res communes. The most open of all is res communes, while with res publicae a distinction is made between what’s state-owned and what belonged to communities. I find it quite fascinating that back in ancient civilisations (without the internet and today’s communication technologies) there is such a level of pragmatic understanding on working models of property.

Information Commons do not have the same tragedy, as they are non-rival or even anti-rival, they benefit from more usage. But they can be hijacked or appropriated. For me, the peer governance processes are aimed at preventing such hijacking, while peer property formats are aimed at preventing private appropriation. So, peer projects are definitely regulated, though every project regulates itself. Because most of the regulation is located within the projects itself, the whole may give the, in my opinion, mistaken, impression that it is unregulated. The regulatoin in this case, doesn’t come from private or public rules, but directly proceeds from the autonomous social processes, it is an emergent property of peer projects, as they learn from experience.