Copyright (c) 2010 All rights reserved. http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson Recent documents in John W. Nelson en-us Sat, 09 Oct 2010 01:31:49 PDT 3600 http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson/4 http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson/4 Thu, 07 Oct 2010 08:39:17 PDT Privacy laws can protect virtual worlds and their users where property law cannot. Yet, legal scholars tend to ignore this power in favor of extending the virtual world metaphor in an effort to see the common law of property cover virtual worlds. This article explores how harms against the citizens of virtual worlds are harms against the victim’s mental state rather than his wallet. A review of the types of privacy law applicable to virtual worlds is provided, and those laws are applied to common virtual world scenarios resulting in harm. Finally, privacy law is offered as the most viable and logical approach to dealing with virtual world harms because of its ability to address mental harms without the need for a property loss. John W. Nelson Computer Law Law and Technology http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson/3 http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson/3 Mon, 10 Aug 2009 21:30:41 PDT ‘Virtual property’ is a solution looking for a problem. Arguments justifying ‘virtual property’ lie among three common themes — Lockean labor theory, theft protection and deterrence, and market efficiency. This paper goes beyond those who advocate for or against the creation of ‘virtual property.’ First, Locke’s labor theory is dismissed as a justification. Then, two models of what property rights may look like when applied to virtual resources are created. These models are then applied to six different virtual world scenarios in order to see the effects of ‘virtual property.’ Finally, the failure of property rights to benefit the users, developers, and virtual resources of virtual worlds is explained. John W. Nelson Law and Technology http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson/2 http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson/2 Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:51:39 PDT Our laptops are capable of containing large amounts of personal, private, intimate, and confidential information. At the same time, the power of the government to search us and our possessions is at its zenith during a border crossing. How should our laptops be treated during these border crossings?This Note examines the background of the border search exception and the privacy interests we each have in our laptop computers. This Note argues that searches of our laptop computers should be viewed as highly intrusive in nature because of the ability to quickly sort through vast amounts of intimate and private data. Further, this Note argues that a reasonable suspicion should be required before government can search our laptops during a border crossing. John W. Nelson Fourth Amendment http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson/1 http://works.bepress.com/john_nelson/1 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:34:45 PDT Virtual worlds are more successfully blurring the lines between real and virtual. This tempts many to try and equate virtual property with tangible property. Such an equation creates problems when the common law of property is applied to virtual objects over which users can not possess complete dominion and control. The result is a conversion of the tangible resources that support virtual worlds into a virtual commons. Accordingly, the common law of contracts, rather than that of property, should be used to govern transactions between a user and owner of a virtual world. John W. Nelson Law and Technology