Comments on: Epstein on Google http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/02/epstein_on_goog.html The Law, the Universe, and Everything Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:44:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Frank http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/02/epstein_on_goog.html/comment-page-1#comment-60500 Frank Thu, 09 Feb 2006 22:08:22 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/02/epstein-on-google.html#comment-60500 This is just one more of Epstein's efforts to deploy simplistic analogies between physical and intellectual property to promote an extreme view of the prerogatives of IP-owners. Pretending that information is like real property, he asks "Does each person own his or her own separately? Or does every person have open access to each home within the town?," and claims that Google's claim to INDEX information is like some Proudhonian anarchist's claim to a right to quarter himself in my home. Somebody obviously has never heard of nonrivalry in consumption of digitized information. The claim is reminiscent of another Chicago luminary's inspired analogy between Grokster and a "machine that could teleport things out of K-Mart and into its owner's house." Oddly enough, none of these reifying theorists happen to take seriously all the LIMITS and conditions on real property ownership which law imposes. Michael Carrier's done an excellent job cataloging them in a 2004 article on cabining IP via a property paradigm. This is just one more of Epstein’s efforts to deploy simplistic analogies between physical and intellectual property to promote an extreme view of the prerogatives of IP-owners.

Pretending that information is like real property, he asks “Does each person own his or her own separately? Or does every person have open access to each home within the town?,” and claims that Google’s claim to INDEX information is like some Proudhonian anarchist’s claim to a right to quarter himself in my home.

Somebody obviously has never heard of nonrivalry in consumption of digitized information. The claim is reminiscent of another Chicago luminary’s inspired analogy between Grokster and a “machine that could teleport things out of K-Mart and into its owner’s house.”

Oddly enough, none of these reifying theorists happen to take seriously all the LIMITS and conditions on real property ownership which law imposes. Michael Carrier’s done an excellent job cataloging them in a 2004 article on cabining IP via a property paradigm.

]]> By: Chris Hoofnagle http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2006/02/epstein_on_goog.html/comment-page-1#comment-60499 Chris Hoofnagle Tue, 07 Feb 2006 04:43:19 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2006/02/epstein-on-google.html#comment-60499 Wow! This negative option is basically the system that applies to consumers when they want to stop companies from using their personal information. Do you think Epstein would support opt in for use of personal information? Ha! Wow! This negative option is basically the system that applies to consumers when they want to stop companies from using their personal information. Do you think Epstein would support opt in for use of personal information? Ha!

]]>