I've removed this text block as it's poorly sourced and reads more like an essay. Also, the internet is not usually part of "global commons", see for example this publication which states: each of the four global commons (the high seas and deep seabed, the atmosphere, outer space, and Antarctica)
. I would argue that digital commons is separate from global commons. This is the text block that I removed:
Internet
As a global system of computers interconnected by telecommunication technologies consisting of millions of private, public, academic, business, and government resources, it is difficult to argue that the Internet is a global commons. These computing resources are largely privately owned and subject to private property law, although many are government owned and subject to public law. The World Wide Web, as a system of interlinked hypertext documents, either public domain (like Wikipedia itself) or subject to copyright law, is, at best, a mixed good.
The resultant virtual space or cyberspace, however, is often viewed as an electronic global commons that allows for as much or more freedom of expression as any public space. Access to those digital commons and the actual freedom of expression allowed does vary widely by geographical area. Management of the electronic global commons presents as many issues as do other commons. In addition to issues related to inequity in access, issues such as net neutrality, Internet censorship, Internet privacy, and electronic surveillance arise.[1] However, the term global commons generally represents stateless maneuver space, where no nation or entity can claim preeminence, and since 100 percent of cyberspace is owned by either a public or private entity, although it is often perceived as such, cyberspace may not be said to be a true global commons. EMsmile (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC) EMsmile (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
