Property Rights

Welche Theorie(n) bzw. Auffassungen eines Rechts auf Eigentum werden im gerechtigkeitstheoretischen Egalitarismus vertreten? Spezifischer stellt sich die Frage: Lässt der Egalitarismus als eine Theorie der Gleichverteilung Eigentumsrechte überhaupt zu oder schränkt er sie nur stark ein, um Umverteilung zu ermöglichen? Zur Beantwortung dieser Frage wird zuerst der Egalitarismus näher bestimmt. Sodann wird zweitens bestimmt, was Eigentum ausmacht, um dann auf die eigentumstheoretischen Aspekte im Egalitarismus eingehen zu können. Dazu wird drittens gezeigt, dass und warum es für die dominante Rawls’sche Version (...) des Egalitarismus keine moralischen Ansprüche auf Eigentum vor den Ergebnissen der Umsetzung (s)einer übergeordneten Gerechtigkeitstheorie gibt. Anschließend wird auf zwei egalitäre Alternativen zur Rawls’schen Verteilungsgerechtigkeit eingegangen, nämlich die linkslibertäre (im vierten Abschnitt) sowie die linksliberale Eigentumstheorie (im fünften Abschnitt). Die linkslibertäre Auffassung argumentiert mittels einer naturrechtlichen und die (links-)liberale Auffassung mittels einer moralischen Begründung für Freiheits- und Eigentumsrechte als grundlegend. So gelangen beide auf unterschiedlichen Wegen zu egalitaristischen Implikationen für ihre Eigentumsauffassungen. -/- What theory or conception of property rights does egalitarianism as a theory of justice advocate? More specifically, as a theory of equal distribution, does egalitarianism allow for property rights at all, or does it severely restrict them in order to allow for redistribution? To answer this question, we first need to define egalitarianism. Second, it is necessary to determine what constitutes property in order to be able to address the property-theoretical aspects of egalitarianism. Third, it will be shown for the dominant Rawlsian version of egalitarianism that and why there are no moral claims to property before the results of the implementation of a higher ranking theory of justice. Two egalitarian alternatives to Rawlsian distributive justice are then discussed, namely the left-libertarian (in the fourth section) and the left-liberal (in the fifth section) theories of property. The libertarian view argues for freedom and property rights on the basis of natural law, while the (left) liberal view does so on the basis of morality. In this way, both arrive at egalitarian implications for their concepts of property by different routes. (shrink)

Die zeitgenössische Philosophie hat das Problem der Begründung des Rechts auf privates, kollektives oder staatliches Eigentum vernachlässigt. Die Beiträge des vorliegenden Bandes nehmen sich dieses Problems an, indem sie folgende Fragen diskutieren: Wie wurde das Recht auf Eigentum in der Geschichte der Philosophie begründet? Welche Stärken und Schwächen weisen klassische Eigentumstheorien auf? Welche Einwände wurden in der Geschichte gegen das Recht auf Privateigentum vorgebracht? Wie ist das Recht auf Eigentum aus der Perspektive der einflussreichsten Theorien der sozialen Gerechtigkeit zu beurteilen? (...) Ist es moralisch erlaubt oder gar geboten, das Recht auf Eigentum zu beschränken? (shrink)

It is well-established that market governance can be provided by both public (state) and private organizations. However, the concept of private governance has been used, this article contends, to refer to two distinct forms of non-state governance: private governance and community governance. We distinguish between these two forms, arguing that private governance should be understood as the provision of market governance by (external) private parties, while community governance refers to a process where a group, a community, or society has the (...) autonomy to govern its own affairs without interference from external authorities. The former internalizes the externalities associated with governance, while the latter comes about mainly as an unintended externality of social interaction in markets. To further illuminate the differences, and the relative strengths of these types of non-state governance, we distinguish among three elements of market governance: (1) the formation and interpretation of rules, (2) the administration of rules of ownership and exchange, and (3) the enforcement of rules. We argue that community governance is of great relevance for the formation and interpretation of the rules of ownership and exchange, which is consequently very hard to outsource to external parties, private or public. Community governance also plays a frequently overlooked role in administration and enforcement through the process of co-production. Rule formation and interpretation are theorized as the epistemic components of market governance, which can be analyzed within the Governing Knowledge Commons framework. (shrink)

Science is critical and thrives on discourse. However, new challenges for science and academic freedom have arisen from an often-discussed cancel culture and an increasing demand for safe spaces, which are justified by their assumed protection against microaggressions. These phenomena can impede scientific progress and innovation by prohibiting certain thought processes and heterodox ideas that eventually result in new ideas, publications, statements, etc. In this paper, we use the approach of property rights ethics to shed light on these phenomena, especially (...) in academia. First, we argue that microaggressions must be generally tolerated according to property rights ethics as the starting point for discussion. Then, we analyze cancel culture and safe spaces in academia. To this end, we distinguish between two basic cases in the educational system. We show that cancel culture and safe spaces seem justifiable in a private education system but have no place in public, tax-funded universities from the perspective of property ethics. Our essay contributes, on the one hand, to the economic analysis of science and, on the other hand, to the ethical study of new phenomena in modern societies. (shrink)

Natural Property Rights presents a novel theory of property based on individual, pre-political rights. The book argues that a just system of property protects people's rights to use resources and also orders those rights consistent with natural law and the public welfare. Drawing on influential property theorists such as Grotius, Locke, Blackstone, and early American statesmen and judges, as well as recent work in in normative and analytical philosophy, the book shows how natural rights guide political and legal reasoning about (...) property law. It examines how natural rights justify the most familiar institutions in property, including public property, ownership, the system of estates and future interests, leases, servitudes, mortgages, police regulation, and eminent domain. Thought-provoking and comprehensive, the book challenges leading contemporary justifications for property and shows how property both secures individual freedom and serves the common good. (shrink)

The Fab City framework is based on the idea of the global sharing of information and knowledge combined with the local production of physical goods. Besides a digital infrastructure, this framework also needs a legal infrastructure in order to ensure compliance with the Fab City principles. In this regard, the law presents two conflicting approaches: exclusivity through Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) or sharing of information based on the credo of the open-source movement. Both of these approaches might be necessary to (...) enable the Fab City concept to flourish. This article will address this seeming dichotomy. We will further examine the relevance of IPRs and their respective features to the Fab City framework and address licensing challenges that may emerge from their use. (shrink)

This chapter surveys libertarian thought on the question of “historic injustice,” which is when serious injustice goes unresolved for many years. After some historical discussion of early libertarian writing on the subject, I turn to the contemporary debate surrounding reparations for slavery. After outlining three arguments common among libertarians for reparations, common reasons for skepticism are also discussed. Then, special focus is given to the topic of land theft. In particular, I hone in on what I call the “Poisoning Problem,” (...) or the idea that natural rights approaches to property fail because so much of actually-existing property is founded in conquest. In the conclusion, I highlight two areas where libertarian writing on historic injustice is relatively quiet compared with broader writing on these topics: reparations of a less material sort and transitional injustice. Throughout this chapter, I typically refer to American slavery and land theft, but the discussion is meant to apply much further than those two cases. (shrink)

The “private” dimension of social life is problematic, posing conceptual, political, and ecological challenges. Some of these problems arise from the very nature of private property as it is enshrined in social life, which demands special privileges be granted to “private” matters on the grounds that these are private, because the predominant representation of the involved rights is that they reflect claims of the holders, rather than legitimate claims of society as a whole in allocating responsibilities, benefits, and duties. The (...) claim to the rationality of allocations of property rights, this article argues, must be questioned in light of the kind of commonality that is revealed in a striking manner by environmental issues (although it is not restricted to environmental matters). This questioning makes sense in relation to an analysis of social interactions, beyond the problematic opposition between the private sphere and public life. (shrink)

Wenn es um „den Kapitalismus“ geht, regieren schnell die Gefühle. Die Philosophen Sabine Döring und Lars Neth appellieren an die Vernunft. -/- Interview: Wolf Lotter.

Vietnam is home to a prospering technology community and numerous enterprises that range from small start-ups to development giants. Virtually all public services are offered online. In fact, the country even has a system for e-residency and “data embassies.” This achievement derives in part from the nation’s transparent and enduring political preferences, but more importantly from Vietnamese law and its regulatory system regarding information, the digital general public, and intellectual property rights (IPR) protection. In this examination of the most pertinent (...) aspects of Vietnam’s digital economy legislation, this study explores the nation’s regulatory structure regarding copyright and patents within the context of digital transformation. The study discusses the relationship between foreign and national regulations in terms of IPR protection and the advancement of digitalization. Research on Vietnamese regulations and the practical application of major patent and copyright regulations has revealed that in many respects, the nation is highly reliant on the effective operation of a broader foreign institutional and legal framework. Thus, in the near future, technological advancement will necessitate the establishment of additional transnational regulatory systems. (shrink)

This book provides a detailed account of the role of property in German Idealism. It puts the concept of property in the center of the philosophical systems of Kant, Fichte, and Hegel and shows how property remains tied to their conceptions of freedom, right, and recognition. The book begins with a critical genealogy of the concept of property in modern legal philosophy, followed by a reconstruction of the theory of property in Kant's Doctrine of Right, Fichte's Foundations of Natural Right, (...) and Hegel's Jena Realphilosophie. By turning to the tradition of German Rechtsphilosophie, as opposed to the more standard libertarian and utilitarian frameworks of property, it explores the metaphysical, normative, political, and material questions that make property intelligible as a social relation. The book formulates a normative theory of property rooted in practical reason, mutual recognition, and social freedom. This relational theory of property, inspired by German Idealism, brings a fresh angle to contemporary property theory. Additionally, it provides crucial philosophical background to 19th century debates on private property, inequality, labor, socialism, capitalism, and the state. The Concept of Property in Kant, Fichte, and Hegel will appeal to scholars and advanced students interested in 19th Century German philosophy, social and political philosophy, philosophy of law, political theory, and political economy. (shrink)

Robert Nozick is the most discussed libertarian philosopher of these days. The paper examines the question of whether he supported forced taxation. The normative basis of Nozick’s position, the neo-Lockean theory of natural human rights are analyzed. On the basis of this theory, his argument in favor of the moral justification of the minimal state is reconstructed. While this reconstruction leaves it ambiguous whether such the state should be funded by taxation, six arguments are offered in favor of such tax (...) funding. These arguments are based on the same normative premises as Nozick’s own argument and can therefore be supported by contemporary Nozickians even if Nozick himself rejected taxation. These arguments are shown to help overcome some of the critical objections faced by Nozick’s theory and neo-Lockeanism as a whole. However, accepting these arguments entails accepting not only the tax financing of the minimal state, but also the expansion of the functions of this state to provide citizens with a social minimum in the form of an unconditional basic income or some other form of redistribution. (shrink)

Data has been identified as “the” asset of XXI century, an asset that can be created, manufactured, processed, stored, transferred, licensed, sold and stolen and which raises questions on property rights on them. However, defining data property rights profiles is a very challenging task not only for Chinese legislator: calls for data ownership encounter difficulties of treating data as goods and framing data within the existing property law regime. This is true also within systems belonging to the Western legal tradition (...) where, notwithstanding the growing awareness that “legal mechanism to establish, claim and transfer property rights in data” must be adopted no concerted approach to the question on data ownership has been found. As a matter of fact, data differ from traditional strategic assets based on which property law has been shaped, since they are duplicable virtual entities, neither tangible nor exclusive by nature.This essay will explore the Chinese trajectory towards defining the legal foundation of data propertyData property rights, also from the perspective of digital sovereigntyDigital sovereignties. The first emersion of data ownership issues within the context of the legal battles between various Chinese internet platforms will be analyzed. Then, an overview of policy and legislative initiatives following these cases and an analysis of the data-specific legislation enacted in the year 2021 will be made. Particular attention will be devoted to the Shenzhen Pilot Regulation on data, where property law issues have been addressed. Finally, a review of the existing academic literature on the suitability of the property rights system for data in the Chinese legal context and an introduction to the most recent policy paper will be made. (shrink)

In this paper, I argue that specificationism deprives rights of any significant role in practical reasoning before it arrives at a conclusion, while the generalist conception preserves the practical role we intuitively assign to rights in reasoning directed to action. Assuming that a conception of rights faithful to ordinary practical reasoning is preferable, this fact gives a strong reason to prefer generalism over specificationism, although not without qualification. To be satisfactory from the practical standpoint, any account of rights that adopts (...) the generalist view must include second-order principles to orientate agents with regards to addressing rights conflicts. I show that my practical analysis is substantially different from others available in the literature. (shrink)

This article explores the remaking of classical liberal rights in digital spaces, with a focus on property rights in artificial intelligence (AI) crowds. The rise of crowds in digital and technological spaces has created new opportunities for users, but their accumulated contributions create added value for the platforms and manufacturers that manage the crowd, leading to a curtailment of individual autonomy. The article identifies two parallel processes that characterize individuals’ involvement in digital crowds: manufacturers construct the property rights of individual (...) users as crowd-based rights, while also working to de-crowd users in other contexts. The article compares crowd-based rights to potential group rights and individual rights in non-digital spheres, exposing the weakness of manufacturer-constituted crowd-based rights. The article concludes by discussing possible legal conceptions of the crowd and its governance. (shrink)

According to the standard story, there are two defensible theories of property rights: historical and institutional theories. The former says that you own something when you’ve received it via an unbroken chain of just transfers from its original appropriation. The latter says that you own something when you’ve been assigned it by just institutions. This standard story says that the historical theory throws up a barrier to redistributive economic policies while the institutional theory does not. In this paper, I argue (...) that the standard story is wrong in almost every detail. For a start, neither of these theories are defensible. Both generate absurd consequences when combined with our non-ideal circumstances. In actuality, no unbroken chains of just transfers stretch from original appropriation to what we now possess. And our actual institutions are very seriously unjust. So both theories imply that we actually own almost nothing. I revise these theories so that they avoid this absurd consequence. Yet, when we do this, their distributive implications flip. The institutional theory throws up serious barriers to redistribution while the historical theory tears them down. In our non-ideal circumstances, the distributive implications of these theories are the opposite of what is standardly presumed. (shrink)

Philosophical theories of property rights struggle to adequately explain the moral significance of ownership. We propose that the moral significance of property rights is due to the intersection of what we call "the extended self” and conventionally protected rights claims. The latter, drawing on conventionalist accounts of property rights, explains the social nature and flexibility of property. The former, drawing on naturalist theories, explains their personal nature. The upshot is that we find at this intersection the full moral significance of (...) property. (shrink)

This Article explores how managerial prerogative shapes disputes over employment classification and reveals a neglected but prominent feature in legal arguments about platform worker rights—the disputed relevance of a platform’s intellectual property rights. In classification disputes, instead of denying that it has a right to control how others perform services for it, the company often concedes its employer-like authority but offers an alternative rationale: managerial prerogative. The company argues, and judges often agree, that its labor control is not the exercise (...) of employer authority but instead reflects a prerogative of enterprise ownership, like a right to protect property and determine product lines. Thus, managerial prerogative both explains labor control and exempts that control from the statutory duties that would otherwise attach under the legal tests. Platform companies appear to have taken notice of such cases and designed their work relationships around property-based rationales. For instance, Uber uses a software “license” in which drivers agree to Uber’s authority as a condition for accessing the app. The license depicts the terms upon which drivers must affirmatively cooperate with Uber to produce transportation as simply the negative duties not to interfere with Uber’s intellectual property. The Article concludes that we must reject appeals to managerial prerogative in employment classification disputes. To assume that a property-based rationale for labor control is inconsistent with employment is to misunderstand the legal basis of employment and the purpose of statutory labor law. The appeals also rely on dubious economic assumptions and conflate property rights with agreements about the use of property. (shrink)

This chapter demonstrates that counter-arguments against such a right from analytic legal theory, among them Steiner’s, do not succeed. Although there are no rights on the part of post-mortem persons, a right to bequeath can be explained by and built around posthumous interests of the testator that might be adversely affected after his or her demise. This perspective, however, would have to be based upon an interest theory of rights. For proponents of a will theory of rights such as Steiner, (...) the Hohfeldian approach offers a different and more adequate way to reconstruct a right to bequeath, not as a claim-right, but as a legal power to create a persisting legal relation. The existence and validity of such a legal relation is independent of whether the person who created it can still be ascribed or is able to express any subjective interest in it or any direction of will. If this legal relation is not honoured, if the legal duties created and defined by it are not fulfilled, the testator’s right to bequeath is infringed upon. As there are no limits to the right to bequeath based on conceptions of individual rights or the technicalities of legal theory, the chapter will point to more promising paths for a normative critique of the right to bequeath. (shrink)

We live in a market system and witness much economic inequality. Although such inequality may not be an essential characteristic of market systems, it seems historically inevitable. How we should evaluate this inequality, on the other hand, is contentious. I propose that bleeding heart libertarians provide the best diagnosis and prescription.

Die Eigentumsgarantie nimmt nicht nur in der deutschen Verfassung, dem Grundgesetz, eine bedeutende Stellung ein, sondern prägt auch die verfassungsrechtlichen Grundlagen der europäischen Nachbarstaaten und vieler anderer Rechtsordnungen auf dem Globus. Neben der Bewahrung konkreter Eigentumspositionen gewährleistet die Eigentumsgarantie vor allem das Freiheitsanliegen des Einzelnen, der im Eigentum die materielle Absicherung seiner Selbstbestimmung findet. Allerdings steht das Eigentum nicht allein im Dienst des Eigentümers; es soll auch dem Gemeinwohl dienen. In dieser Wechselbezüglichkeit entstehen Konflikte und es verfestigt sich zusehends eine (...) Unausgewogenheit, wenn durch den Gebrauch von Eigentum ökologische Gemeinwohlinteressen nachhaltig verletzt werden, etwa bei der Zerstörung von Umweltgütern oder dem (übermäßigen) Verbrauch von Umweltressourcen. Dies spricht für eine Neuausrichtung des Verständnisses von Eigentum und seiner Beziehung zu sozio-ökologischen Notwendigkeiten, wobei diese sich an den aktuellen ökologischen Herausforderungen für die Gesellschaft‍(en) – weltweit – orientieren muss: Der im Eigentum verankerte Anteil an Rechten muss wieder mit den sozialen und ökologischen Verantwortlichkeiten in Balance gebracht werden. Hierzu gibt es sozio-historisch, aber auch verfassungsrechtlich vielversprechende Ansatzpunkte; ein aktuelles Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts zum Klimaschutz deutet in dieselbe Richtung. (shrink)

This research article is devoted to the analysis of the Intlectual poperty law and rights in the phase of the digtal economy. Ths is because today Intelectual property law has already reached not only the local, but also the global, international importance. According to the effective international conventions, agreements and treaties system, the world community receives a large amount of income from intellectual property and its sale, which means that ideas, developments and individual rights have a significant share in the (...) GDP of developed countries. Universal international intergovernmental organizations have also been established to ensure interstate international cooperation. (shrink)

The article addresses the role of scarcity in negotiating the relationship between intellectual property, particularly from a legal-economic perspective, and property rights, as understood by transaction cost economics, to shed light on the deadlock faced by those suffering from neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). The consistency of the law and economics fundamentals that support the trade on knowledge goods, namely patents on essential medicines, is put under check by Scott Veitch’s scholarship on legal irresponsibility. The damages that emerge from the operations (...) of the intellectual property system are registered in the novel concept of negative public domain, and are due mainly to the lack of access to treatments that end up being unaffordable, or to innovation that leads to new drugs that is not sufficiently incentivised though price signals. The accountability for such damages is taken into consideration by arguing that the disavowal of responsibility is made possible by the negative public domain, which is balanced by the construction of a positive response through the language of rights. As such, responsibility per se is preserved, evading one instantiation of Teubner’s legal paradoxes, but rendered ineffective by design. In other words, even if the harms endured by those affected by the NTDs can be traced back to the operations of the intellectual property system, there is no one to hold accountable. The main goal pursued through the article is to make such an arrangement explicit, by giving centrality to the notion of scarcity and its interplay between legal and economic theory, alongside the novel concept of negative public domain as a site where the actual consequences of irresponsibility lie, to hopefully inform further critique in subsequent works. (shrink)

The article argues that persons should be conceived as self-owners and entitled to acquire private property within justifiable property conventions because they should be able to live as project pursuers. This is the ‘project pursuit argument’. It leads to a conception of self-ownership that is stringent, but weaker than standard libertarian notions of self-ownership, and to an understanding of private property as a convention that has to meet a sufficientarian threshold in order to be justifiable.

Concentric Space as a Life Principle beyond Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Ricoeur invites a fresh vision of human experience and search for life meanings in terms of potential openings through relational space. Offering a radical spatial rereading of foundational ideas of influential thinkers Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Ricoeur, it argues that these ideas can be rethought for a more fundamental understanding of life, self and other. This book offers a radical reconceptualisation of space as an animating principle for life through common, although (...) previously hidden, features across the thought of Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Ricoeur. It offers a fresh spatial interpretation of key themes in these thinkers' works, such as compassion, will to life, Dionysian rapture, will to power, selfovercoming, re-valuation of values, eternal recurrence, living metaphor and intersubjectivity. It proposes a spatial restructuring of experience from diametric spaces of exclusion towards concentric spaces of inclusion for an experiential restructuring towards unifying modes of experience. This spatial rereading of these major figures in philosophy directly challenges many previous understandings, to offer a distinctive spatial-phenomenological framework for examining a life principle. This book will appeal to academics, researchers and postgraduates engaged in the study of philosophy, wellbeing, education and human development. The book's interdisciplinary scope ensures that it is also of interest for those in the fields of psychology, anthropology, psychoanalysis and culture studies. (shrink)

The connections between death, contemplation and the contemplative life have been a recurrent theme in the canons of both western and eastern philosophical thought. This book examines the classical sources of this philosophical literature, in particular Plato's Phaedo and the Katha Upanishad and then proceeds to a sustained analysis and critical assessment of the sources and standpoints of a single thinker, Arthur Schopenhauer, whose work comprehensively pursues this problem. The book traces the pivotal issue of death through the whole range (...) of Schopenhauer's writings uncovering the deeper connotations of his crucial notion of the will-to-live. (shrink)

In this paper, I present an objection to the reflective equilibrium method based on land purchases and trespassing. I then propose a solution, which involves a change to how we regard the method.

Most non-human animals live in the wild and it is probable that suffering predominates in their lives due to natural events. Humans may at some point be able to engage in paradise engineering, or the modification of nature and animal organisms themselves, to improve the well-being of wild animals. We may, in other words, make nature 'red in tooth and claw' no more. We argue that this creates a tension between environmental ethics and animal ethics which is likely insurmountable. First, (...) we argue that concern for the environment can be compatible with helping individual wild animals but should see redesigning nature as morally impermissible. Second, we argue that if we are concerned with animal well-being, we may reject that we have a duty to help wild animals even to the point of redesigning nature, but we must nevertheless concede that it is permissible to do so under certain circumstances. We show how this permissibility can be derived from three animal rights views: Tom Regan's, a novel account inspired by Thomas Pogge and a libertarian approach to animal rights. (shrink)

The failure of the Canadian pharmaceutical company Biolyse Pharma to obtain authorization under Canada’s Access to Medicines Regime to produce 15 million badly needed doses of a generic copy...

Scientists find themselves working more and more with indigenous, traditional and local communities in all aspects of their collections and investigations. Indigenous knowledge has become increasingly important in research, while at the same time local communities have become increasingly politicized in the use, misappropriation, and commercialisation of their knowledge and biogenetic resources. It is becoming more and more difficult for even the most well-intentioned scientists to stride into indigenous areas and collect plants, animals, folk tales, and photos without having first (...) to convince local leaders that the scholarly efforts will somehow benefit the communities — that the benefits of research results will directly and indirectly lead to strengthening the traditional society. In many parts of the world, indigenous peoples only allow Collaborative Research in which the scientific priorities and agendas are controlled by the communities, or Community Controlled Research in which the communities actually contract scientists to carry out the group’s research plan. Control over data has become one of the key ‘battle cries’ for the indigenous movement, that is now demanding Intellectual Property Rights over information obtained through research and just compensation for economic benefits that eventually may accrue. This paper deals with some of the ethical and practical issues that frame this rapidly evolving debate. (shrink)

Efficiency requires legislative political institutions. There are many ways efficiency can be promoted, and so an ongoing legislative institution is necessary to resolve this choice in a politically sustainable and economically flexible way. This poses serious problems for classical liberal proposals to constitutionally protect markets from government intervention, as seen in the work of Ilya Somin, Guido Pincione & Fernando Tesón and others. The argument for the political nature of efficiency is set out in terms of both Pareto optimality and (...) aggregate welfare maximisation, and similar arguments can be generalised to other social values. (shrink)

James Penner has probably done more than anyone else in legal philosophy to set the terms of debate in property theory for the past two decades. His 1997 book, The Idea of Property in Law initiated...

Libertarianism is understood to be a “deontological theory of law” that purportedly applies exclusively to humans. According to some libertarians, however, “one of the greatest weaknesses of libertarian theory” is that there are no provisions outlawing the abuse and torture of animals even though this seems to be one of “the most heinous acts it is possible to do”. Moreover, a few of these libertarians go even further and claim that this legal philosophy of non-aggression should actually be extended to (...) include other animals. The purpose of this paper is to reconcile this seemingly irreconcilable situation by arguing that it is a “continuum problem” and offering a principled, libertarian compromise that resolves the animal rights debate using the non-aggression principle and private property rights. (shrink)