The question, it seems to me, is whether the medium is public or private. If public then open to all, if private then restricted.
In the USA:
= The government or owned by the government.
Example #1: The interstate highway system is "public". It is owned by the states. Anyone in the public can use it whenever they want to, though it does have some use rules (speed limits)
Example #2: The U.S. Postal Service. It is owned by the Federal Government. Anyone in the public can use it anytime, though it does have some use rules (you have to pay and you cannot use it to commit crimes).
Example #3: The NIPERNET: This is owned by the federal Government. It is a Military/Government version of the Internet
. While it is technically "public" it has some very specific use rules (for much of it "you" must be employed by the Federal Government. Though some of it is "open access".
Example #4: The National Park Service's network. This is owned by the Federal Government. A large portion of it is available to the public any time they want it. It does, however, have some use rules for portions of it.
= Owned by people, organizations, companies and/or corporations.
Example A: The Dulles Greenway
is a privately
owned 14-mile toll road that connects Washington Dulles International Airport with Leesburg, Virginia. Anyone in the "public" can use it, if you follow the rules. For most of it you have to pay a toll and there are speed limits.
Example B: The UPS. It is owned "privately". Anyone in the "public" can use it, if you follow the rules. Anyone in the public can use it, but you have to pay and you cannot use it to commit crimes (they will report you if they find out).
Example C: Facebook. It is owned "Privately". Anyone in the "public" can use it, if you follow the rules. Anyone in the "public" can use it, but it has some use rules. You have to agree to not violate their rules. If you do, you can be banned.
Example D: There is a restaurant down the street that is own by a man. It is a "privately owned" business. Anyone in the "public" can use that restaurant. He has three (3) use rules that I know of (there might be more...
) 1st: No Smoking; 2nd: Payment is by cash or credit/debit card; 3rd: He reserves the right to not serve anyone that he does not want to serve
. That is, if he doesn't like you... you have to leave. Depending on the specifics of the situation, it is not inconceivable that someone could take him to court. The only person that I have ever heard of them refusing service to was a drunk. The police seemed to think he (the owner) was within his rights. No one has ever taken him to court (I know
because I asked him... we are friends... I wasn't being a jerk...
The end... for now....