Matthew Sullivan wrote:
der Mouse wrote:
Does anyone know of any law, either way, in any jurisdiction, bearing
on that theory? (I'd hope it would be shot down, but would much prefer
to know, either way.)
Specifically for right-of-way there is a (bi)law that mandates the
timeout for right-of-way.
I have a mental block on the term used to describe this particular
theory from common law. It's similar to but not quite adverse
possession (squatter law). It's not eminent domain (expropriation) or
easement (contractual right-of-way) either.
If you let someone cross your land without impeding them, for a specific
period of time (20 years IIRC), after that period you cannot legally
stop them. If they have removed anything you set to impede them (eg a
fence) they can be taken to court for trespass.
It has to be continuous unfettered access, and the period is different
from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Here I think it's 10 years. It's
been applied (successfully) in "walkers versus the mall" cases.
Every year the Nortel Ottawa Campus is "gated" (security stands at the
road access and "controls access") for a day to break continuity - we
have ponds that outsiders visit to watch the geese... ;-)
This is despite the fact that the land is leased from the NCC
(governmental organization). Probably a lease requirement, and probably
why visitors are normally tolerated.
I know of no laws relating to technical/internet/computer issues that
How many providers _haven't_ been filtering in one way or another for
years? Continuity is presumably broken, even if the law could be
twisted to apply outside of land access/ownership rights.
Asrg mailing list