3 ms·
IIRC, people want to use a road on his private property to access the public beach part. So Khosla is saying, come to the beach all you want, but not by using t
by onetimemanytime 8y ago
IIRC, people want to use a road on his private property to access the public beach part. So Khosla is saying, come to the beach all you want, but not by using the road on my private property. Cute.
Maybe the state should just launch eminent domain like proceedings and let courts decide on the price. He's not saying (that all) the beach is his, just don't come through my land to go to the public part. It has the same effect but it's different.
- mattkrause 8y agoPeople are legally entitled to use the road on his property to access the beach, which is slightly different. I can see this being weird if the access rights were addded after you bought the land, but if the easement long predates your ownership, as it allegedly does in this case, I don’t really see why “property rights” should be allow you to wiggle out of it. That easement is part and parcel of the property you bought—-it may have cost even more if it weren’t included!
- onetimemanytime 8y ago>>People are legally entitled to use the road on his property to access the beach, which is slightly different. To be fair, the courts are deciding this as we speak and maybe in the next 20 years :). The person has the right to argue this in courts, until the doors are slammed in his face. Before or after they are ways to do this--legally, price is the only issue.