Mine!

Key Takeaways

1. Ownership is a social construct, not a natural fact

Ownership is the endpoint, not the start, of analysis.

Ownership as choice. Contrary to common belief, ownership is not a predetermined fact but a socially engineered choice. It's a conclusion we arrive at after considering various factors, not an inherent property of things. This realization opens up possibilities for reimagining ownership structures to better serve societal goals.

Historical context. Throughout history, ownership rules have been shaped by those in power to serve specific interests. For example, European colonizers defined ownership in ways that justified dispossessing Native Americans of their land, despite their long-standing presence and use of the territory.

Implications. Understanding ownership as a construct allows us to:

• Question existing ownership structures
• Design new ownership models to address contemporary challenges
• Recognize the power dynamics inherent in ownership rules

2. Six core stories define all ownership claims

There are no natural, correct descriptions that frame mine versus mine conflicts.

The six stories. All ownership claims ultimately derive from one of six fundamental narratives:

1. First in time
2. Possession
3. Labor
4. Attachment
5. Self-ownership
6. Family ties

Competing narratives. In any ownership dispute, different parties may invoke different stories to justify their claims. For instance, in conflicts over airplane seat space, some passengers argue based on attachment (the space is connected to their seat), while others claim first-in-time rights (they reclined first).

Strategic use. Understanding these core stories allows individuals and organizations to:

• Frame their ownership claims more effectively
• Anticipate and counter opposing arguments
• Recognize the underlying principles at play in ownership disputes

3. Strategic ambiguity and baselines shape ownership rules

Strategic ambiguity works to the airlines' advantage.

Power of ambiguity. Many organizations deliberately maintain unclear ownership rules to maximize their flexibility and profits. Airlines, for example, often avoid clearly defining rights to reclining space, allowing them to sell the same space twice without explicitly doing so.

Baseline importance. The initial ownership baseline significantly influences subsequent outcomes:

• It creates a status quo that people tend to accept
• Changing established baselines often faces resistance
• Setting the right baseline can nudge behavior in desired directions

Examples:

• Southwest Airlines' ambiguous seating policy
• Default opt-in vs. opt-out choices for organ donation
• Undefined ownership of genetic data

4. Attachment principle extends ownership beyond physical boundaries

Attachment is the tool by which owners claim new resources plausibly connected to something they already own.

Expanding ownership. The attachment principle allows ownership to extend beyond the immediate physical boundaries of a property. This concept applies to various contexts:

• Airspace above land
• Underground resources
• Intellectual property derivatives

Contested boundaries. The limits of attachment are often disputed, leading to conflicts over:

• Drone flights over private property
• Groundwater rights
• Oil and gas extraction

Legal evolution. Courts and legislatures continually refine the boundaries of attachment:

• Limiting airspace rights to accommodate air travel
• Developing unitization rules for oil fields
• Balancing solar access rights with property development

5. Self-ownership spans a spectrum from sacred to profane

We have been framing our choices the wrong way.

Beyond binary thinking. Rather than viewing self-ownership as an all-or-nothing proposition, it's more accurate to consider it as a spectrum with various degrees of control and commodification.

The ownership dimmer. This metaphor helps conceptualize the nuanced control over bodily resources:

• Fully on: unrestricted sale (e.g., hair)
• Partially on: regulated markets (e.g., eggs in some jurisdictions)
• Partially off: limited donations (e.g., kidneys in most countries)
• Fully off: no transfers allowed (e.g., selling oneself into slavery)

Ethical considerations. Determining where to set the "dimmer" for different bodily resources involves balancing:

• Individual autonomy
• Prevention of exploitation
• Societal benefits
• Cultural and moral values

6. Inheritance laws perpetuate wealth inequality

There's a reason they call the show Deadliest Catch.

Unintended consequences. Inheritance laws, often designed with good intentions, can lead to unintended negative outcomes:

• Fragmenting land ownership among heirs, rendering it unusable (e.g., heir property in the American South)
• Concentrating wealth in dynastic trusts (e.g., South Dakota's trust laws)
• Perpetuating racial wealth gaps

Policy choices. Different approaches to inheritance have significant societal impacts:

• Estate taxes vs. unrestricted inheritance
• Rules against perpetuities vs. dynasty trusts
• Community property vs. separate property systems

Reform challenges. Changing inheritance laws faces obstacles:

• Entrenched interests of the wealthy
• Complex legal structures
• Public misunderstanding of inheritance issues

7. The sharing economy redefines ownership for the digital age

"How many of you own a power drill?"

From ownership to access. The sharing economy shifts focus from owning things to accessing services when needed:

• Ride-sharing instead of car ownership
• Short-term rentals instead of hotels
• Tool-sharing platforms instead of individual purchases

Enabling factors:

• Smartphone technology
• Internet connectivity
• Digital payment systems
• Trust-building mechanisms (e.g., user ratings)

Pros and cons:

• Increased resource efficiency
• New economic opportunities
• Potential loss of community cohesion
• Shift from asset accumulation to service consumption

8. Environmental ownership innovations can save ecosystems

A good environment will produce good water.

Ecosystem services. Recognizing and valuing the services provided by natural ecosystems can lead to better conservation outcomes:

• Clean water from healthy watersheds
• Carbon sequestration by forests
• Flood protection from wetlands

Innovative ownership models:

• Payments for ecosystem services
• Cap-and-trade systems for pollution
• Catch shares in fisheries

Success stories:

• New York City's watershed protection program
• Acid rain reduction through sulfur dioxide trading
• Recovery of fish stocks through catch share systems

9. Digital ownership restricts consumer rights in unexpected ways

When we buy online, we don't buy the full bundle, just a couple of sticks.

Limited rights. Digital purchases often come with far fewer rights than their physical counterparts:

• E-books can be remotely deleted by sellers
• Digital movies may become inaccessible due to licensing changes
• Software-dependent devices can be "bricked" by manufacturers

Bundle of sticks metaphor. In the digital realm, consumers often receive only a few "sticks" from the full bundle of ownership rights:

• Right to access (but not transfer or resell)
• Limited right to use (subject to terms of service)
• No right to modify or adapt

Consumer awareness. Most people don't realize the extent of these limitations:

• "Buy now" buttons can be misleading
• Terms of service are rarely read or understood
• Ownership expectations from physical goods don't translate to digital products

Last updated: January 25, 2025

Report Issue