« Additional Thoughts on Alito | Main | Muhammed Cartoons, Free Speech, and International Relations »

January 31, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c031153ef00d834a6717d69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Information Asymmetries and the Rights to Exclude - A Strahilevitz Podcast:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Mike Giamo

This is a nice blog!

AJTALL

Lior,

I really enjoyed listening to your talk on my MP3 player. Your examples of exclusionary behavior - the 3 types you identified - seemed obvious once you explained them. Where I live many contractors include the Christian "fish" symbol on their business cards. This may be an example of "inclusionary" conduct in hopes of gaining business from others. How would that fit into your examples or would it?

Also, you didn't seem to fully answer Professor Fischel's question about the confederate flags in the clubhouse. He asked if the owner would have some defense to a charge of discrimination. Perhaps, he was alluding to a first amendment right of free speech or some taking.

Anyway, it was a great talk. I learned quite a bit. Thanks.

AJ

Lior

AJ,

I didn't hear Dan's question to be asking that, but it's entirely possible I misheard him. So here's what I'd say.

First Amendment defenses to the FHA's anti-advertising provisions have not fared well. Dan's hypothetical didn't involve an advertisement, so you would have to decide whether those precedents ought to be extended to cover design choices. That strikes me as a reasonable extension of existing precedents.

More broadly, one point I make in the paper linked above, but didn't have time to cover in the talk, is that I think the court is wrong to treat vibes as protected speech, and would be better served conceptualizing them as property rights. In that light, I think courts ought to ask whether government limitations on private owners' vibes amount to Takings, not whether they would violate the First Amendment. That is a normative argument, however, not a descriptive one.

AJTALL

Lior,

Thanks for the response. It is a real privilege to have any kind of discussion with you. I have no affiliation with Chicago whatsoever, but I doubt any other school has such a distinguished faculty. As an aside, I can't believe you're still an "assistant" professor. You've published more "scholarly" papers than most full law professors will in their lifetimes. You're the Saul Levmore of your generation. I look forward to hearing more of your talks.

Hello

hi
[url=http://www.wowpower-leveling.com]world of warcraft Powerleveling
[/url]. wowpower-leveling.com is an Expert Online
[url=http://www.wowpower-leveling.com]world of warcraft Power leveling[/url]
[url=http://www.wowpower-leveling.com]wow Powerleveling
[/url] Site, dedicated in providing customers with fun in the professional service of
[url=http://www.wowpower-leveling.com]wow Power leveling
[/url]. Excellent Service, Super wow power leveling.
[url=http://www.needrsgold.com]runescape gold[/url]
[url=http://www.needrsgold.com]rs gold[/url]
[url=http://www.needrsgold.com]rs2 gold[/url]
[url=http://www.needrsgold.com]runescape money[/url]

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.