IPcentral Weblog: Physical Property Archives

Physical Property Archives

(see all subjects)

04. 3.2007

Property in China

John Rutledge blogs on China's growing trend toward protecting property rights.

People in China struggle with the same issues we do in America, including local government officials and developers trying to take your house so they can build a shopping center. Sound familiar? This issue is especially important in light of the new private property law passed by China's legislators last week.

He cites the overwhelming public support for a couple who are resisting the authorities' attempt to take their house. (See the incredible pix of the house.)

posted by James DeLong @ 7:50 PM | Big Tent , International , Physical Property

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (0)

02. 6.2007

Kelo -- Welcome to the Real World of Government Planning

The Supreme Court decision in Kelo upholding the right of cities to use eminent domain for anything they choose was full of hidden assumptions about disinterested government officials earnestly seeking the bono publico.

Prof. Richard Epstein (a member of the IPCentral Academic Advisory Council) introduces you to the real world in a recent National Journal article:

Continue reading Kelo -- Welcome to the Real World of Government Planning . . .

posted by James DeLong @ 10:10 AM | Big Tent , Physical Property

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (2)

02. 1.2007

Property Rights Alliance

The Property Rights Alliance Hill Working Group will meet on Thursday, February 8th, from 11am-12 noon, in 121 Cannon House Office Building. Topics:

Eminent Domain Reform: Can the Senate get the job done?
Updates on compulsory licensing issues in Thailand
Northern Europe’s love of free music continues
How “neutral” will the network get?
Just how much land does the US Government own?

If you have an agenda item, please contact Scott LaGanga at at slaganga@atr.org or 202-390-6978.
All encouraged to bring handouts.
The session is off the record.

posted by James DeLong @ 2:43 PM | Big Tent , Legislation and Legislators , Physical Property

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (0)

01. 4.2007

Department of Huh?

Instapundit, one of the most-read conservative blogs, has a link to a recent Larry Lessig presentation, and follows it up with a strange comment:

UPDATE: Lessig's pretty hard on the Democrats and Howard Berman over intellectual property, which makes me wonder -- yet again -- why the Republican Congress never took the opportunity to expand fair use rights, gut the DMCA, and generally stick it to the entertainment industries, which are a crucial source of funding for the Democratic Party and the left generally. It's not like this tactic wasn't obvious. (I wrote in 2002: "Will Republicans take advantage of this opportunity? That depends on whether they want to be a majority party - or history." Well. . . .) Plus, it was the right thing to do.
And read this, too.

The first strangeness lies in his assumption that virtue lies in destroying IP rights by expanding fair use and eliminating DRM. The conclusion is devoid of analytical support in either the immediate post or in the linked material, which, aside from making some trivial points that IP is a complex area, difficult to get right, demonizes Big Hollywood in terms usually associated with leftist blogs and their assault on Big Oil, Big Pharma, Corporate Greed and other bete noirs of the world’s depressingly large population of sophomores.

A fundamental problem with the analysis (?) is the lack of recognition that any artists who want to create a career without relying on property rights or DRM are absolutely free to do so, and the existing media companies are powerless to stop them. So if openness is a better model, then how can these companies “suppress competition” by not adopting it? Instead, they would be creating an opportunity for others.

Second, the Republican Congress abandoned many principles in the last five years. One of the bright spots was its refusal to abandon its dedication to property rights as applied to intellectual creations, despite what must have been tremendous temptation to do so. Instead, principled conservatives have gone the other way, linking IP rights and other property rights, viz. the Property Rights Alliance. Good for them.

posted by James DeLong @ 11:53 AM | Academia , Access: Commons, Fair Use, Orphan Works, Public Domain , Big Tent , DRM & Watermarks, etc. , Free Culture Movement , Physical Property

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (2)

12.29.2006

Human Rights

Plane rides are for reading, so on my way to MT, I re-read the excellent artilcle by Prof. Mark Schultz and David Walker, HOW INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY BECAME CONTROVERSIAL: NGOS AND THE NEW INTERNATIONAL IP AGENDA.

The piece discusses what it calls "The New International IP Agenda" and its proponents, which have:

brought new controversy into international IP policy discussions. This broad agenda, united by a thread of skepticism regarding intellectual property and a common network of NGOs and activists, has been asserted in many different contexts. Discussions and negotiations regarding a wide variety of topics, including international development, pharmaceuticals, software patents, the digital divide, and cultural policy, now include contentious debates regarding the morality and efficacy of intellectual property rights.

No one would deny that properly defining and delimiting intellectual property rights is devilishly difficult, but I don't think that is really the focus of the proponents of this new agenda, who are, basically, opposed to intelletual property. They do not want to solve the problems; they want to use the problems as a lever to undermine the basic institution of IP rights.

To a large degree, this attack uses the language of "human rights" -- the people of the world have a right to medicine, or knowledge, or whatever, and therefore anything that inhibits access RIGHT NOW, even in the interests of long run development, is immoral.

But what a crabbed view of human rights this represents. The peoples of the world have a right to be dependent, and to be doled out whatever goods and services the do-gooders and planners of the developed world decide they deserve, this year. (It may change next year.)

Those of us who are pro-property rights have a rather different view of human rights. We think everyone has a right to be a proud and producing member of the global economy, with an opportunity to reap the rewards of his/her actions and to decide for his/her self what goods and services he/she deserves in exchange. This seems not to be something the proponents of the new IP agenda want -- for whatever dark psychological reason.

But I will take our vision over theirs, any day, and under any criteria you want to apply, practical or ethical.

posted by James DeLong @ 12:34 PM | Big Tent , Free Culture Movement , International , Physical Property , Telecom

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (1)

12.27.2006

Holiday Greetings from Kelo

A holiday card from Susette Kelo of eminent domain fame sent to various people involved in her case.

posted by Amy Smorodin @ 2:24 PM | Physical Property

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (0)

12.11.2006

Property Rights Alliance

The Property Rights Alliance will hold its monthly meeting on Thursday, Dec. 14, 11:00-12:00 a.m., in Room 1116 of Longworth HOB. Agenda: the 110th Congress and what issues are on deck for the private property rights community.

To get on the agenda, contact Scott LaGanga, 202-390-6978, slaganga@propertyrightsalliance.org.

posted by James DeLong @ 11:39 AM | Big Tent , Physical Property

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (0)

11.10.2006

Property/Market Doubleheader at AEI

On Monday, Nov. 13, at 10:30 a.m., Yegor Gaidar, President of the Institute of the Economy in Transition, will lecture on The Collapse of the Soviet Union: Lessons for Contemporary Russia. Gaidar was "acting prime minister during the first government of President Boris Yeltsin and the architect of the free-market revolution in post-Soviet Russia."

Then, starting at Noon, will be a luncheon at which Judge Stephen F. Williams of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will talk on his new book Liberal Reform in an Illiberal Regime, 1906–1915: The Creation of Private Property in Russia (Hoover Institution Press, 2006). Yegor Gaidar will be a discussant.

Separate registrations are required for the Gaidar lecture and the Williams lunch.

I was careful to reserve a place at both events before posting this. Gaidar is one of the great figures of the second Russion Revolution, and Judge Williams is one of the most respected law & econ (and history) scholars on the Federal bench.

posted by James DeLong @ 8:03 AM | International , Physical Property

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (0)

11. 9.2006

Counter-Kelo

12 anti-Kelo initiatives were on state ballots this election. The Volokh Conspiracy looks at the scorecard::

During this fall's elections, voters in twelve states considered anti-Kelo referendum initiatives that sought to ban or curtail the condemnation of private property in order to promote "economic development." Ten of the twelve passed, all by lopsided margins ranging from 55% to 86% of the vote. . . .
Continue reading Counter-Kelo . . .

posted by James DeLong @ 9:44 AM | Big Tent , Physical Property

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment (0)