"R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, it isn't but not the way you think. Information can be possessed,
> but transaction cost to own it is *extremely* low. Like something
> asymptotically approaching the cost of transmission, storage, and, of
> course, encrypting it.
I'll buy the possession charge.
> In other words, if it's encrypted and I have the key to it, information
> becomes my *property*, no matter what the information is, whether it's
> about me, or someone else.
>
> In "cypherspace" encryption has the same place that fences, or legal title,
> or armed force, whatever.
Except that with fences, if I let the wrong person in, they can't turn
around and give everyone duplicates of the land inside my fence.
Legal titling and armed force may attempt to stop the person from
doing that, but then we get right back to the *extremeley* low
transaction costs and the enabling powers of crypto.
Reasoning by analogy will not give you property rights.
