5 ms·

Lawyer here. I wrote a pretty lengthy analysis on implications of AR application intersecting with real property: http://associatesmind.com/2016/07/11/is-pokem

by keithrl 10y ago

Lawyer here. I wrote a pretty lengthy analysis on implications of AR application intersecting with real property: http://associatesmind.com/2016/07/11/is-pokemongo-illegal/ http://associatesmind.com/2016/07/11/is-pokemongo-illegal/ It's a novel issue of first impression. There is no controlling statute or case law. The most we can do is make informed speculation at this point. My guess is that at some point a court will find that property rights will extend to geo-spatial, virtual property boundaries. That is, you retain control of how your property appears in 'cyberspace.'

wyager 10y ago
Jesus, I hope that's false. Cyberspace isn't real. It's absolutely insane to suggest that one ought to have control over some abstract data just because there exists a vague correspondence between some part of that data and some piece of land they own in the real world. Should photographs of buildings be illegal? After all, it's just a virtual representation of the real property. In fact, it's a much closer representation than just "these fake coordinates vaguely resemble these real coordinates".
- tremon 10y ago
  I think you're missing context here: the GP specifically said he was talking about implications of AR application intersecting with real property.
  - yoodenvranx 10y ago
    Yes, exactly, I am not talking about some random virtual world but specifically about AR and its connection to the real world. I wonder what the military thinks about the Ingress portals and PokemonStops on their bases. In worst case that will results in some virtual ban zones around military compounds where AR is forbidden.
  - BatFastard 10y ago
    AR and its intersection with real property is a HUGE topic. Can people post ads on your building in AR? Can they write nasty things about you and your customers? Can they setup trap for drug dealers? There are literally hundreds of such questions. Do you have control over how Google maps depicts your properties, how about China Netcom? AR is the worlds biggest genie, and people are just starting to become aware of it. The idea of "Controlling AR" is ridiculous! Its going to come from a million places..
  - wyager 10y ago
    AR doesn't "intersect" with anything. It's virtual. It's pixels on a screen. What shows up on my screen has no connection to someone else's physical property.
- heartsucker 10y ago
  So let's say in some future everyone is always wearing AR. Now let's some someone somehow got derogatory terms to constantly float above your head. There are negative impacts from this: loss of job, harder to meet people, unable to get hire. Because AR "isn't real", should you have no recourse against this? At the gut level, that doesn't feel right, so as much as some people want to pretend The Web is some wild west of freedom and lawlessness, it really makes sense (some times, with experts consulted) to have (some) regulations.
  - wyager 10y ago
    You're leaving essentially everything about this scenario underspecified, but no; it should not be illegal to say mean things about someone through technology. Do you really have to ask that question?
    - heartsucker 10y ago
      If somone followed someone else around all day and yelled obscenities at them, there are laws to punish the perpetrator. If someone followed you around everywhere you went on the internet and comment and messaged and posted obscenities at you, you'd want the same protection. I'm not saying people shouldn't be able to speak freely, but somewhere out there is a line that crosses from exercising freedom of speech into harassment. This comic [0] explains it nicely. Just because it's on the internet and "not real life" doesn't mean it doesn't affect your happiness or your life "offline." [0] - https://xkcd.com/1216/ https://xkcd.com/1216/
      - wyager 10y ago
        > If someone followed you around everywhere you went on the internet and comment and messaged and posted obscenities at you, you'd want the same protection. It's called a troll, and no I wouldn't, because I'm not a tremendous wanker. I'm an emotionally stable adult who can deal with someone calling me names. I prioritize free speech over the feelings of people who can't take shit on the Internet. It's not that I've never felt bad after someone criticized me on the Internet; it's that I understand that life is full of positive and negative interactions and you have to deal with both. Crying and demanding that insulting you be made illegal is a puerile and unhealthy response.
- monocasa 10y ago
  > Cyberspace isn't real. You could argue it's just as real as the other fairly arbitrary borders that define public vs private property.
maxerickson 10y ago
Do you think such a decision would apply to "cyberspaces" like this one: -75,40,28 That's a (chosen) coordinate pair and an (invented) observation about something at the coordinate pair. Will the property owner be able to force me to delete my 28?
- frou_dh 10y ago
  Point a megapixel b&w camera at something (maybe your triplet written on a napkin) and when you press the shutter button it will choose a single coordinate in a million-dimensional space. No annotation needed!
theseatoms 10y ago
Yes! So my privacy rights will finally extend to how my virtual person is represented in virtual space. (i.e. Google's and Facebook's servers)
keenerd 10y ago
Are you positive there is no precedence? I can think of countless examples of manually augmented reality. Let's say someone publishes a book of addresses or GPS coordinates. They claim these are hotbeds of paranormal activity. Or ley lines. Or something. People are going to visit these locations based on fictional claims. Possibly they might even get something they value out of visiting the location. (Information from the dead, positive energy vibrations, whatever.) AR that claims to be authoritatively non-fictional has been done too. Think of a tourist guide book, saying what is worth visiting around town. I don't see how "the app told me I would find something there" is different from "the book told me I would find something there".
intrasight 10y ago
Interesting sub-thread. But most commentary seems to be assuming that there is only one cyberspace - like in Snow Crash. That is not the case and I don't see it becoming the case. When I walk around in AR cyberspace, I'll not see things that others decide to show me. I'll see no ads. I'll see no obnoxious graffiti. Why would I. It's my cyberspace - I'll see and interact with things of my own choosing.
- arcticfox 10y ago
  This is the same as "I'll browse the Internet on my phone and see no ads, no spam, no stupid comments. Why would I? It's my phone." Which is theoretically true, if you built your own OS, your own clients to every app, your own perfect spam capture...
  - intrasight 10y ago
    When you "browse the internet" you are going to someone else's space. When I use my computer, I'm in my own space until I choose not to be. AR will be no different, or no one is going to use it.
    - heartsucker 10y ago
      You sound very sure about that, but then 25 years ago people probably would have thought it unthinkable for all of their photos, connections, and personal posts on a single platform (facebook, etc.). Paying $200 for someone else's AR device that "just works" vs. rolling your own and maintaining it? What do you thin the average consumer is going to pick.
      - intrasight 10y ago
        I'm not talking about the device. I'm talking about where I visit with it. I do expect the device to "just work" - like a monitor.
fucking_tragedy 10y ago
Google Maps has my property's location and image on Google's database. Yelp has my property's location and image on Yelp's database. Pokemon Go has my property's location and image on Niantic's database. I don't like how my property is portrayed on Google or Yelp. I have no recourse. Why is Pokemon Go different?

by keithrl 10y ago

wyager 10y ago

Jesus, I hope that's false. Cyberspace isn't real. It's absolutely insane to suggest that one ought to have control over some abstract data just because there exists a vague correspondence between some part of that data and some piece of land they own in the real world. Should photographs of buildings be illegal? After all, it's just a virtual representation of the real property. In fact, it's a much closer representation than just "these fake coordinates vaguely resemble these real coordinates".

tremon 10y ago
I think you're missing context here: the GP specifically said he was talking about implications of AR application intersecting with real property.
- yoodenvranx 10y ago
  Yes, exactly, I am not talking about some random virtual world but specifically about AR and its connection to the real world. I wonder what the military thinks about the Ingress portals and PokemonStops on their bases. In worst case that will results in some virtual ban zones around military compounds where AR is forbidden.
- BatFastard 10y ago
  AR and its intersection with real property is a HUGE topic. Can people post ads on your building in AR? Can they write nasty things about you and your customers? Can they setup trap for drug dealers? There are literally hundreds of such questions. Do you have control over how Google maps depicts your properties, how about China Netcom? AR is the worlds biggest genie, and people are just starting to become aware of it. The idea of "Controlling AR" is ridiculous! Its going to come from a million places..
- wyager 10y ago
  AR doesn't "intersect" with anything. It's virtual. It's pixels on a screen. What shows up on my screen has no connection to someone else's physical property.
heartsucker 10y ago
So let's say in some future everyone is always wearing AR. Now let's some someone somehow got derogatory terms to constantly float above your head. There are negative impacts from this: loss of job, harder to meet people, unable to get hire. Because AR "isn't real", should you have no recourse against this? At the gut level, that doesn't feel right, so as much as some people want to pretend The Web is some wild west of freedom and lawlessness, it really makes sense (some times, with experts consulted) to have (some) regulations.
- wyager 10y ago
  You're leaving essentially everything about this scenario underspecified, but no; it should not be illegal to say mean things about someone through technology. Do you really have to ask that question?
  - heartsucker 10y ago
    If somone followed someone else around all day and yelled obscenities at them, there are laws to punish the perpetrator. If someone followed you around everywhere you went on the internet and comment and messaged and posted obscenities at you, you'd want the same protection. I'm not saying people shouldn't be able to speak freely, but somewhere out there is a line that crosses from exercising freedom of speech into harassment. This comic [0] explains it nicely. Just because it's on the internet and "not real life" doesn't mean it doesn't affect your happiness or your life "offline." [0] - https://xkcd.com/1216/ https://xkcd.com/1216/
    - wyager 10y ago
      > If someone followed you around everywhere you went on the internet and comment and messaged and posted obscenities at you, you'd want the same protection. It's called a troll, and no I wouldn't, because I'm not a tremendous wanker. I'm an emotionally stable adult who can deal with someone calling me names. I prioritize free speech over the feelings of people who can't take shit on the Internet. It's not that I've never felt bad after someone criticized me on the Internet; it's that I understand that life is full of positive and negative interactions and you have to deal with both. Crying and demanding that insulting you be made illegal is a puerile and unhealthy response.
monocasa 10y ago
> Cyberspace isn't real. You could argue it's just as real as the other fairly arbitrary borders that define public vs private property.

maxerickson 10y ago

Do you think such a decision would apply to "cyberspaces" like this one: -75,40,28 That's a (chosen) coordinate pair and an (invented) observation about something at the coordinate pair. Will the property owner be able to force me to delete my 28?

frou_dh 10y ago
Point a megapixel b&w camera at something (maybe your triplet written on a napkin) and when you press the shutter button it will choose a single coordinate in a million-dimensional space. No annotation needed!

theseatoms 10y ago

Yes! So my privacy rights will finally extend to how my virtual person is represented in virtual space. (i.e. Google's and Facebook's servers)

keenerd 10y ago

Are you positive there is no precedence? I can think of countless examples of manually augmented reality. Let's say someone publishes a book of addresses or GPS coordinates. They claim these are hotbeds of paranormal activity. Or ley lines. Or something. People are going to visit these locations based on fictional claims. Possibly they might even get something they value out of visiting the location. (Information from the dead, positive energy vibrations, whatever.) AR that claims to be authoritatively non-fictional has been done too. Think of a tourist guide book, saying what is worth visiting around town. I don't see how "the app told me I would find something there" is different from "the book told me I would find something there".

intrasight 10y ago

Interesting sub-thread. But most commentary seems to be assuming that there is only one cyberspace - like in Snow Crash. That is not the case and I don't see it becoming the case. When I walk around in AR cyberspace, I'll not see things that others decide to show me. I'll see no ads. I'll see no obnoxious graffiti. Why would I. It's my cyberspace - I'll see and interact with things of my own choosing.

arcticfox 10y ago
This is the same as "I'll browse the Internet on my phone and see no ads, no spam, no stupid comments. Why would I? It's my phone." Which is theoretically true, if you built your own OS, your own clients to every app, your own perfect spam capture...
- intrasight 10y ago
  When you "browse the internet" you are going to someone else's space. When I use my computer, I'm in my own space until I choose not to be. AR will be no different, or no one is going to use it.
  - heartsucker 10y ago
    You sound very sure about that, but then 25 years ago people probably would have thought it unthinkable for all of their photos, connections, and personal posts on a single platform (facebook, etc.). Paying $200 for someone else's AR device that "just works" vs. rolling your own and maintaining it? What do you thin the average consumer is going to pick.
    - intrasight 10y ago
      I'm not talking about the device. I'm talking about where I visit with it. I do expect the device to "just work" - like a monitor.

fucking_tragedy 10y ago

Google Maps has my property's location and image on Google's database. Yelp has my property's location and image on Yelp's database. Pokemon Go has my property's location and image on Niantic's database. I don't like how my property is portrayed on Google or Yelp. I have no recourse. Why is Pokemon Go different?