Do owners of real, intellectual, and personal property each have the same rights under the law?

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Owners of different types of property (physical, intellectual, etc) all have different provisions under the law. Due to the different nature of these types of property, there are differences in what ownership and use of them means.

Real property is physical and can clearly be attributed to the owner. An...

Unlock
This Answer Now

Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. Enjoy eNotes ad-free and cancel anytime.

Start your 48-Hour Free Trial

Owners of different types of property (physical, intellectual, etc) all have different provisions under the law. Due to the different nature of these types of property, there are differences in what ownership and use of them means.

Real property is physical and can clearly be attributed to the owner. An individual owns a vehicle and has a record of purchase. This can be enforced and agreed upon since it is fairly obvious who owns it. They have very solid protection under the law because it is tangible property.

Personal property deals more with personal items that are physical but are presumed to be yours because you possess them. For instance, a chair handed down from a parent is personal property even if there isn’t proof of purchase. It is also tangible as enforceable, because you clearly have possession of it.

Intellectual property is intangible and therefore ownership is based primarily on who claimed it first. Additionally, it can be shared and leant out more easily since it is conceptual instead of physical. It is more complicate to enforce ownership of intellectual property.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Owners of real, personal, and intellectual property do not have the same rights under the law in the United States for a number of reasons having to do with the nature of property, the development of law in each area, and the allocation of state and federal jurisdiction in this country. 

First, real and personal property are tangible, something we can see and touch.  Intellectual property is intangible.  So, the means by which we protect and transfer or share rights is quite different.  Personal property rights are generally rooted in possession, meaning that if I have something, there is a presumption that I own it.  That is, of course, a rebuttable presumption, but this is generally the basis of one's rights in personal property.  One's rights in real property are almost always based upon a writing, at least in the United States. The sole exception is adverse possession, meaning one gains rights in a personal property by acting as though one owns it for a number of years, but this is quite rare.  Otherwise, all states require a deed to establish possession and assert the rights of ownership, against all others who might trespass or occupy.  Intellectual property, because it is intangible, is different because one can "own" a patent or copyright that one can use oneself and still allow others to use it with proper permission or under the fair use doctrine.  Thus, if I write a book, I cannot seek compensation if a teacher quotes briefly from the book in a classroom, one example of the fair use doctrine.  The rights one has in intellectual property are not nearly as absolute as those of personal or real property. 

A second distinction lies in the development of law in these areas.  Rights in real and personal property in the United States are generally based upon English common law, meaning that most principles associated with ownership arise from cases decided hundreds of years ago.  On the other hand, ownership rights in intellectual property are always statutory, meaning a legislature has created a specific law to deal with this kind of ownership. 

A third difference involves the allocation of power over these very different areas of ownership in the United States Constitution.  The Constitution gives Congress jurisdiction over intellectual property law, while personal and real property matters are left to the states.  Thus, it is up to Congress to determine the process of creating these rights, the process by which one asserts these rights, and the penalties for violating these rights.  A person who seeks to assert intellectual property rights does so in a federal court.  No state can do this. The states, however, provide the case law and some statutes that are the underpinnings of rights in real and personal property, and most cases that arise in these areas are litigated in state courts. 

How one creates one's rights and how one asserts one's rights in these forms of property is very different in the United States, for historical, jurisdictional, and very practical reasons. 

 

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team