Digital Property Law [was RE: [MUD-Dev] Selling training]

[Joe Andrieu]

> Steve (Bloo) Daniels wrote:
> Joe Andrieu wrote:

>> Steve (Bloo) Daniels wrote:
>>> Joe Andrieu wrote:

>> So, your premise is that digital property will only be handled by
>> contract law?

> Actually, my presumption is that "digital property" as you have
> described it, is not property in any legally significant context.
> I'm open to evidence and opinions on the matter but that's the
> position I start with.

Your argument makes a good case for Digital Property (DP) as I
describe it to be outside the domain of things considered property by
the courts.  It does seem however that from a certain perspective it
should be and looking long term at the benefits gained IMO, it will
eventually be.

>> Ok, that may get rid of the implied terms in my example, > but I'm
>> not convinced it will set contract law above all other law in all
>> situations.

> Don't think of it as one type of law being placed 'over' another.
> Think of it more as a judge looking for an 'out' to get the
> sure-to-be-confusing case off of his docket.  If you like, think of
> the contract law issues as a crutch that a judge can, and IMO will,
> lean on to get the case out and over with ASAP.  And in all
> likelihood, that will only come after a judge strenously urges the
> parties to reach a deal and keep it out of his court room.


Ah. This I wholeheartedly agree with.  And from a practical
perspective, it is probably safe to say that most judges aren't going
to consider DP real property. But it does seem that there are
arguments which could be made that might be convincing enough to take
the matter to the Supreme Court. And I think those arguments will
eventually make it there, at which point its a more complicated issues
to predict the outcome.

>> I argue that if it doesn't already exist, then it will.  Property
>> rights allow people to engage in transaction that they otherwise
>> wouldn't.  Why pay $1000 for the Mofo Sword if I'm just > going to
>> get PK'd and lose it as soon as I leave the store?  I won't.  But
>> give me property rights enforced in some way by the system and I
>> will.

> And you can do that with a contract that provides and exclusive
> service, i.e., access, use of, return of, Item X (a
> copyright-protected element of Game Y).

Agreed. And this is what I think will happen, should happen, and is, I
argue, the establishment of the rule of law within the MUD.  It's not
quite the same as the courts' mandating it, but it is perhaps a
convergent phenomenon that from the players' perspective the same
thing.

> And I think you could have a system that achieves the same result
> you want without resorting to property law issues.

I think such a system is property law, but perhaps that's just a
semantic abstraction that means different things to you than to me.

I would say that looking at societal changes over the next 30 years,
it is inevitable that a concept of digital property will emerge which
is enforced by the courts. This may simply be the requirement that
virtual environments have a clearly delineated and property system,
i.e., no ambiguity to confuse players.  I guess what is not clear is
how soon a court would be willing to hear arguments favoring my
position.

-j

--
Joe Andrieu
Realtime Drama

joe at andrieu.net
+1 (626) 395-1011

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev