"Clyde Slick" wrote

They own those copyrights. Copyright
is property, just like real estate.

No, real estate is real property.

Well, yes and no. Copyright and ownership in
real estate, under the law, are very similar.
Both are actually a *bundle of rights*.

but different bundles of different
types of rights, with under different
sets of legal parameters.


By definition, real property/real estate are
used to differentiate the land and all its
permeant attachments as opposed to
personal property. This has nothing to
do with ownership.

But it has to do with the way those particular
rights are treated by law, and the differences
thereto.


The highest level of real estate ownership
is Fee Simple Absolute. This describes a
particular bundle of rights afforded the
property holder.

Yes, that is the underlying, or residual right,
within the bundle of rights.

We cannot own real estate,
in the truest sense in the USA, unlike
personal property.

Yes, it is not absolute, it is owned subject to a number
of superior rights still resident in local/state and
Federal government, such as police power,
escheat and eminent domain. Plus, it is also
subject to the rights of others, should
any of the bundle of rights been previously conveyed
(such as lease, life estate, or easement)


Copyright property is intellectual property.
the nature of the two properties, in
law, is different, and the rights associated with
them are different.

Only in that if one seek relief in the courts
different laws (Federal, State, local) govern
protections of those bundles of rights.


For instance, within the Code of Maryland,
Real Property has its own unique Title.

"Title"... please define.

Its own unique section of the Code, spelling out
rights and obligations peculiar to real estate, as
opposed to other types of property.


This is a factual statement, and is not
intended to belittle the rights of intellectual
property, but, in fact, copyright property is
different than real property.

In what way? I think you are hung-up on
the meaning/use of "property."


no!

" They own those copyrights. Copyright
is property, just like real estate."

It is not "just like" real estate.

Well, we know what we’re talking about
anyway.

When Jute wrote "Without lies chaos and
brutality"/troll bait) it was seemed as he was
using the term "property" figuratively. As we
know many real estate transactions are "lies
chaos and brutality" and often aren’t at
arms-length by design. If he had substituted
*controllable asset* for "property" we wouldn’t
have had the opportunity to enriched the
board with this thread.

"Powell" wrote in message
...

"Clyde Slick" wrote

They own those copyrights. Copyright
is property, just like real estate.

No, real estate is real property.

Well, yes and no. Copyright and ownership in
real estate, under the law, are very similar.
Both are actually a *bundle of rights*.

but different bundles of different
types of rights, with under different
sets of legal parameters.


By definition, real property/real estate are
used to differentiate the land and all its
permeant attachments as opposed to
personal property. This has nothing to
do with ownership.

But it has to do with the way those particular
rights are treated by law, and the differences
thereto.


The highest level of real estate ownership
is Fee Simple Absolute. This describes a
particular bundle of rights afforded the
property holder.

Yes, that is the underlying, or residual right,
within the bundle of rights.

We cannot own real estate,
in the truest sense in the USA, unlike
personal property.

Yes, it is not absolute, it is owned subject to a number
of superior rights still resident in local/state and
Federal government, such as police power,
escheat and eminent domain. Plus, it is also
subject to the rights of others, should
any of the bundle of rights been previously conveyed
(such as lease, life estate, or easement)


Copyright property is intellectual property.
the nature of the two properties, in
law, is different, and the rights associated with
them are different.

Only in that if one seek relief in the courts
different laws (Federal, State, local) govern
protections of those bundles of rights.


For instance, within the Code of Maryland,
Real Property has its own unique Title.

"Title"... please define.

Its own unique section of the Code, spelling out
rights and obligations peculiar to real estate, as
opposed to other types of property.


This is a factual statement, and is not
intended to belittle the rights of intellectual
property, but, in fact, copyright property is
different than real property.

In what way? I think you are hung-up on
the meaning/use of "property."


no!

" They own those copyrights. Copyright
is property, just like real estate."

It is not "just like" real estate.

Well, we know what we're talking about
anyway.

When Jute wrote "Without lies chaos and
brutality"/troll bait) it was seemed as he was
using the term "property" figuratively. As we
know many real estate transactions are "lies
chaos and brutality" and often aren't at
arms-length by design. If he had substituted
*controllable asset* for "property" we wouldn't
have had the opportunity to enriched the
board with this thread.




I'm just preparing for tomorrow.
Trying to get into the holiday spirit.