3 ms·
> It seems fairly obvious to me (though perhaps not to others) that Khosla is in the right here. The private land is his. He can do what he wants with it. You
by Analemma_ 7y ago
> It seems fairly obvious to me (though perhaps not to others) that Khosla is in the right here. The private land is his. He can do what he wants with it.
You and Khosla are both wrong. If an area is designated public land, you cannot de facto prevent all access by buying up all the land around it and refusing to provide any point of entry; you must provide an easement (and you can even charge a small fee for it, if you want). This is a very well-established bit of property law, and Khosla is only weaseling out of it on technicalities.
- harryh 7y agoI covered access in my third bullet point. You are responding to something I said in my second bullet point. The conflating of these two distinct points is one of the core areas of misunderstanding surrounding the case.