Usually common ownership, f.i. the ownership of land, houses or other resources by a collective entity is understood as being opposed to individual ownership. But in fact, both differ only gradually, because both are defined (as opposed to undefined) property regimes. And therefor, both exlude other persons. In the case of individual ownership everybody else than the individual owner is excluded from the decision making over the given resource. In the case of collective ownership everybody who is not part of the group/collective is excluded. Therefore, it is important to understand, two things:
- 1) Within the commons we have to deal with borders and the problem of exclusion. - 2) Within the commons collective / communal ownership and indidvidual use can be combined.
As a consequence of the latter:
- every co-owner has the right to use the property or a portion of it
- every co-owner has the right to get a portion of it for individual purposes just as monks in a monastry share their lifes and economies but have individual monastic cells (html 
) where they are allowed to close the doors and enjoy their privacy.
# See also Relationalize Property, inappropriability,