The anticommons in knowledge is distinct from the anticommons in physical objects. The former is always tragic, the latter not necessarily so. For society at large, the tragedy of the anticommons is more serious when it involves knowledge than when it involves physical resources. Buchanan and Yoon’s (2000) formal model of the anticommons is incorrect even within the neoclassical context, and their neoliberal suggestion that single ownership is the socially optimal solution to the tragedy of the knowledge anticommons is misleading. This article argues that the only, epistemically and socially beneficial solution to the tragedy of the knowledge anticommons is to create, expand, and protect the knowledge commons. The article also constructs a simple formal model based on Bessen and Maskin’s (2006) sequential model, as a metaphor for how the comedy of the knowledge commons works. The analysis supports the worldwide movement for free knowledge, and dissents from the evolving political and academic consensus in China in favor of more restrictive intellectual property regimes.