Pub Date : 2018-05-30DOI: 10.22329/WYAJ.V35I0.5690
Terry Skolnik
This article argues that our current understanding of the relationship between access to housing and liberty (or freedom) is limited. It contends that judicial decisions and existing legal theory are predominantly concerned with the connection between housing and the two conceptions of liberty famously advanced by Isaiah Berlin: positive liberty and negative liberty. The notion of positive freedom conceptualizes freedom as self-mastery, whereas negative liberty portrays freedom as non-interference. The central premise of this article is that the republican theory of freedom (or republicanism) provides new insight into the importance of access to housing in protecting liberty, most notably in contexts where the state regulates public property, such as in Canada and the United States. The republican theory of freedom defines liberty as non-domination, meaning the absence of others’ power to interfere with an individual’s life and actions. This article argues that we develop a more well-rounded grasp of the value of access to housing by understanding its role in protecting individuals against domination. This article concludes by setting out the four concrete ways that housing reduces domination and safeguards individual freedom in contexts where the state regulates public property. By combining the respective insights of positive liberty, negative liberty, and republican liberty, this article ultimately provides a more robust understanding of the importance of housing in protecting freedom.
{"title":"Freedom and Access to Housing: Three Conceptions","authors":"Terry Skolnik","doi":"10.22329/WYAJ.V35I0.5690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22329/WYAJ.V35I0.5690","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that our current understanding of the relationship between access to housing and liberty (or freedom) is limited. It contends that judicial decisions and existing legal theory are predominantly concerned with the connection between housing and the two conceptions of liberty famously advanced by Isaiah Berlin: positive liberty and negative liberty. The notion of positive freedom conceptualizes freedom as self-mastery, whereas negative liberty portrays freedom as non-interference. \u0000The central premise of this article is that the republican theory of freedom (or republicanism) provides new insight into the importance of access to housing in protecting liberty, most notably in contexts where the state regulates public property, such as in Canada and the United States. The republican theory of freedom defines liberty as non-domination, meaning the absence of others’ power to interfere with an individual’s life and actions. This article argues that we develop a more well-rounded grasp of the value of access to housing by understanding its role in protecting individuals against domination. \u0000This article concludes by setting out the four concrete ways that housing reduces domination and safeguards individual freedom in contexts where the state regulates public property. By combining the respective insights of positive liberty, negative liberty, and republican liberty, this article ultimately provides a more robust understanding of the importance of housing in protecting freedom. ","PeriodicalId":446787,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Canadian Law - Property (Topic)","volume":"67 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132791411","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
French Abstract: Le fichier numerique est devenu l’enveloppe essentielle de nos activites numeriques. Objet incontournable de notre consommation et de nos transactions, il n’a pourtant acquis qu’une realite juridique partielle. Seules certaines de ses utilisations sont apprehendees par le droit. L’objectif de cet essai est de poser les bases d’une reflexion theorique au sujet du fichier numerique et d’envisager sa qualification de bien meuble en vertu du droit civil quebecois. Nous chercherons a determiner si le droit des biens peut permettre de saisir l’economie des activites auxquelles il se prete et d’envisager un regime juridique qui lui serait propre. Son utilite est partagee avec une pluralite de sujets et diffuse differentes proprietes. Ainsi, la propriete du fichier numerique devient-elle plurielle, accommodante plutot qu’exclusive. Il s’agit de ce que nous avons appele, par le detour d’une formule qui voile a peine la difficulte du sujet, une propriete ubiquitaire, c’est-a-dire une propriete qui demultiplie ses objets, cree differents lieux de propriete et donc differents titulaires. En d’autres termes, le fichier numerique cree autant de biens qu’il existe d’interets proprietaires legitimes a son endroit. Son service est multiple. Notre etude, meme si essentiellement theorique, a une portee pratique. La qualification du fichier numerique en tant que bien autonome n’est en effet pas sans consequences. Le codificateur pourra ainsi se demander si le fichier numerique ne devrait pas rejoindre « les ondes et l’energie maitrisees par l’etre humain et mises a son service, quel que soit le caractere mobilier ou immobilier de leur source » de l’article 906 CcQ et s’interroger sur les implications fiscales ou autres d’une telle inscription. On se prend alors a imaginer que l’utilisateur pourrait revendiquer un droit de propriete dans les fichiers qui le concernent ou qu’il a acquis sous licence. Cette propriete, toute aussi legitime, serait differente de la propriete intellectuelle qui habite le fichier. English Abstract: The digital file has become the essential medium of our digital activities, the main instrument of our transactions. A companion and item of consumption, it has never completely been recognized by the law. Some of its uses only are captured. The objective of this essay is to lay the foundations of a theoretical reflection about the digital file as movable property under Quebec civil law. We will seek to determine whether property law applies to digital file activities and usages. Property of the digital file becomes complex, multiple and inclusive rather than exclusive. The digital file is the site of various rights that must coexist, a phenomenon that we have called ubiquitous property: a property that multiplies its objects, creates different “things” and reveals different owners. In other words, the digital file creates as much property as there are legitimate property interests. Our study, although essentially theoretical,
数字文件已经成为我们数字活动的基本信封。作为我们消费和交易的不可避免的对象，它只获得了部分法律现实。只有部分用途受法律管辖。本文的目的是为对数字文件的理论反思奠定基础，并考虑其在魁北克民法下作为动产的资格。我们将设法确定财产法是否能够使我们了解它所涵盖的活动的经济，并设想一种适合它的法律制度。它的效用由多个主体共享，并传播不同的属性。因此，数字文件的属性变得复数，适应而不是排他。这就是我们所说的，通过一个几乎掩盖主体困难的公式，一个无处不在的属性，也就是说，一个使其对象多样化的属性，创造了不同的属性位置，从而创造了不同的持有者。换句话说，数字文件创造的商品与合法的所有者利益一样多。它提供多种服务。我们的研究虽然本质上是理论性的，但也有实际意义。将数字文件描述为一种独立的商品并非没有后果。档案编纂目前能够这样一问数值不应加入«电波和能源部maitrisees由人体微量元素并投入使用了他的脾气,不论其来源的家具或房地产906条»CcQ和反省这类登记的税收或其他影响。因此，可以想象用户可以对与他有关的文件或他在许可下获得的文件主张所有权。这种所有权，同样合法，将不同于存储在文件中的知识产权。英文文摘:The digital牵头has The essential medium of our digital活动,成为The hand of our交易工具。一个伴侣和消费物品，它从来没有完全承认法律。它的一些用途被捕获了。= =地理= =根据美国人口普查，这个县的面积为，其中土地面积为，人口为。我们将寻求确定物权法是否适用于数字文件活动和使用。数字文件的所有权变得复杂、多重和包容，而不是排他性。数字文件是各种权利必须共存的网站，一种我们称之为无处不在的属性的现象:一种使其对象倍增、创造不同“事物”并揭示不同所有者的属性。the digital In other words,领导不相信as much as are痕迹legitimate interests地产地产。= =地理= =根据美国人口普查，该镇的土地面积为。数字文件作为独立财产的资格确实并非没有后果。立法者很可能想知道，数字文件是否不应加入CCQ第906节的“波浪或能源捆绑并供人使用，其来源是可移动的还是不可移动的”，或此类编纂的税收影响问题。事实上，互联网用户自己可能对他们根据许可证拥有或获得的文件主张所有权。这一新的财产将不同于文件中所包含的知识产权。
{"title":"La propriété ubiquitaire du fichier numérique (The Ubiquitous Property of Digital Files)","authors":"Pierre-Emmanuel Moyse","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2853863","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2853863","url":null,"abstract":"French Abstract: Le fichier numerique est devenu l’enveloppe essentielle de nos activites numeriques. Objet incontournable de notre consommation et de nos transactions, il n’a pourtant acquis qu’une realite juridique partielle. Seules certaines de ses utilisations sont apprehendees par le droit. L’objectif de cet essai est de poser les bases d’une reflexion theorique au sujet du fichier numerique et d’envisager sa qualification de bien meuble en vertu du droit civil quebecois. Nous chercherons a determiner si le droit des biens peut permettre de saisir l’economie des activites auxquelles il se prete et d’envisager un regime juridique qui lui serait propre. Son utilite est partagee avec une pluralite de sujets et diffuse differentes proprietes. Ainsi, la propriete du fichier numerique devient-elle plurielle, accommodante plutot qu’exclusive. Il s’agit de ce que nous avons appele, par le detour d’une formule qui voile a peine la difficulte du sujet, une propriete ubiquitaire, c’est-a-dire une propriete qui demultiplie ses objets, cree differents lieux de propriete et donc differents titulaires. En d’autres termes, le fichier numerique cree autant de biens qu’il existe d’interets proprietaires legitimes a son endroit. Son service est multiple. Notre etude, meme si essentiellement theorique, a une portee pratique. La qualification du fichier numerique en tant que bien autonome n’est en effet pas sans consequences. Le codificateur pourra ainsi se demander si le fichier numerique ne devrait pas rejoindre « les ondes et l’energie maitrisees par l’etre humain et mises a son service, quel que soit le caractere mobilier ou immobilier de leur source » de l’article 906 CcQ et s’interroger sur les implications fiscales ou autres d’une telle inscription. On se prend alors a imaginer que l’utilisateur pourrait revendiquer un droit de propriete dans les fichiers qui le concernent ou qu’il a acquis sous licence. Cette propriete, toute aussi legitime, serait differente de la propriete intellectuelle qui habite le fichier. \u0000English Abstract: The digital file has become the essential medium of our digital activities, the main instrument of our transactions. A companion and item of consumption, it has never completely been recognized by the law. Some of its uses only are captured. The objective of this essay is to lay the foundations of a theoretical reflection about the digital file as movable property under Quebec civil law. We will seek to determine whether property law applies to digital file activities and usages. Property of the digital file becomes complex, multiple and inclusive rather than exclusive. The digital file is the site of various rights that must coexist, a phenomenon that we have called ubiquitous property: a property that multiplies its objects, creates different “things” and reveals different owners. In other words, the digital file creates as much property as there are legitimate property interests. Our study, although essentially theoretical, ","PeriodicalId":446787,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Canadian Law - Property (Topic)","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124724766","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We consider the factor payment effects of a transition from open access to restricted access in the resource sector in the long-run, i.e., when both labor and capital are mobile between sectors. We show that the transition benefits (harms) the factor that is initially used more (less) intensively in the manufacturing sector relative to the resource sector. Our analysis introduces a dual approach used to compare equilibria between property regime types.
{"title":"Open Access vs. Restricted Access with Two Variable Factors: On the Redistributive Effects of a Property Regime Change","authors":"R. Congar, Louis Hotte","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2497578","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2497578","url":null,"abstract":"We consider the factor payment effects of a transition from open access to restricted access in the resource sector in the long-run, i.e., when both labor and capital are mobile between sectors. We show that the transition benefits (harms) the factor that is initially used more (less) intensively in the manufacturing sector relative to the resource sector. Our analysis introduces a dual approach used to compare equilibria between property regime types.","PeriodicalId":446787,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Canadian Law - Property (Topic)","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121582124","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：