4 ms·

Should the existing property rights only last as long as current owners? As soon as the property ownership pass to another person/entity, the current law should

Should the existing property rights only last as long as current owners? As soon as the property ownership pass to another person/entity, the current law should apply?

harryh 12y ago
Property is, in most cases, property. It can be bought, sold, inherited, transferred, etc.
- michaelt 12y ago
  I assume boomzilla doesn't mean confiscating the entire property, simply that with its transfer the california constitution should apply - including article X, which guarantees public access to beaches. In the UK, which has a long and sometimes poorly recorded legal history, there are procedures for this sort of thing. If land has some unusual legal status conferred on it by a 500 year old law, the government can simply pass a law saying "not any more it doesn't" and the unusual legal status is removed. I dread to think how complicated land ownership would end up after multiple hundreds or thousands of years if there were no way to change or update the laws made by our long-dead ancestors.
  - jfoutz 12y ago
    In the US, treaties with other countries become part of the "supreme law of the land" along with all the other federal stuff congress passes. Individual states don't have the right to alter those (effectively federal) laws. Sure, it could be changed, California is a big powerful state, but their representatives are busy people, and i'm sure billionaires can donate a few thousand dollars to ensure the issue never really comes up at the federal level.
- rdtsc 12y ago
  In general, in California, in US? Those are not as self-evident and obvious things. Nebraska for a while had a allodial title system up until 2005. Yeah you could basically pay a huge chunk of property taxes ahead and then be "free from property taxes". Well free as long as they didn't die. So yeah property is property is not as simple.
tomp 12y ago
Why? Don't get me wrong, I would totally support that kind of property principles, but given how it would apply to e.g. IP rights, I don't think it's viable in the current corpocratic atmosphere.
scott_karana 12y ago
That was my first impression too, but it gets tricky. What if your descendents want to live on the same plot of land where they grew up, after your death? Does the plot regress in size?
samstave 12y ago
For generations, thi is how property tax has been protected from riing; it is legal to transfer property to a blood relative without a re-assessment of the property tax. i.e. the tax level set when purchased can be maintained. However with sale of property between strangers, there is a new assessment at each transaction. This should be the same for coding rights too, it would seem. There may be instances where this is not the case... It would seem though that some people want to preserve such classifications when it comes to historical properties - which may be the play Khosla is taking. (He is also claiming that his LLC owns it - and not him directly, thus he doesnt need to go to court, personally).

Should the existing property rights only last as long as current owners? As soon as the property ownership pass to another person/entity, the current law should apply?

harryh 12y ago

Property is, in most cases, property. It can be bought, sold, inherited, transferred, etc.

michaelt 12y ago
I assume boomzilla doesn't mean confiscating the entire property, simply that with its transfer the california constitution should apply - including article X, which guarantees public access to beaches. In the UK, which has a long and sometimes poorly recorded legal history, there are procedures for this sort of thing. If land has some unusual legal status conferred on it by a 500 year old law, the government can simply pass a law saying "not any more it doesn't" and the unusual legal status is removed. I dread to think how complicated land ownership would end up after multiple hundreds or thousands of years if there were no way to change or update the laws made by our long-dead ancestors.
- jfoutz 12y ago
  In the US, treaties with other countries become part of the "supreme law of the land" along with all the other federal stuff congress passes. Individual states don't have the right to alter those (effectively federal) laws. Sure, it could be changed, California is a big powerful state, but their representatives are busy people, and i'm sure billionaires can donate a few thousand dollars to ensure the issue never really comes up at the federal level.
rdtsc 12y ago
In general, in California, in US? Those are not as self-evident and obvious things. Nebraska for a while had a allodial title system up until 2005. Yeah you could basically pay a huge chunk of property taxes ahead and then be "free from property taxes". Well free as long as they didn't die. So yeah property is property is not as simple.

tomp 12y ago

Why? Don't get me wrong, I would totally support that kind of property principles, but given how it would apply to e.g. IP rights, I don't think it's viable in the current corpocratic atmosphere.

scott_karana 12y ago

That was my first impression too, but it gets tricky. What if your descendents want to live on the same plot of land where they grew up, after your death? Does the plot regress in size?

samstave 12y ago

For generations, thi is how property tax has been protected from riing; it is legal to transfer property to a blood relative without a re-assessment of the property tax. i.e. the tax level set when purchased can be maintained. However with sale of property between strangers, there is a new assessment at each transaction. This should be the same for coding rights too, it would seem. There may be instances where this is not the case... It would seem though that some people want to preserve such classifications when it comes to historical properties - which may be the play Khosla is taking. (He is also claiming that his LLC owns it - and not him directly, thus he doesnt need to go to court, personally).