http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/04/23/teen.be.gone.ap/index.html
Must I make no noise at all that would reach my nieghbors property, how does noise play into property rights?
Good post, I tried to ask about this in the Aviation Regulation thread. I have no clue. An extension of this question that I am curious to hear is: In an anarchist society, how would noise complaints be handled? i.e. I am having a party with live Rock music in my backyard with a band at 2 am. How can anybody stop me?
I’d say its just like any other form of pollution.
Say you own a noisey factory. If someone moves in next door you don’t have to change your behavior. Your homestead includes as much nature as you were using. Because your neighbor is free to homestead anything that was not being used, the actual land, they can move in; but since you were metaphorically “using” the sound spectrum first, your neighbors can not claim it.
If there is no “noise easement”, presumably any noise would be pollution and unallowed, but since the victim must bear the cost of enforcement himself, and his compensation must be proportional, it would not be economically feasible to antagonize your neighbor for minor occurrences.
I’d say Jon has the basics right. Basic common law principles have already wored through this stuff in connection with various pollution cases.
What this means in the case of adjoining properties is that if either owner starts a new, noisy use that offends his neighbor, his neighbor has a claim for trespass under the common law (and for an injunction and damages).
In the case of these new “anti-teen” devices, no one’s rights are being violated at all - unless it’s the owner or occupant of an adjacent building who is bothered.
I don’t understand why previous sound should have anything to do with it. If someone routinely throws knives onto a piece of property before you buy it, you have every right to stop him after you buy it.
Some level of sound should be ignored, but another level should be stopped. It’s not clear cut, but people are often too sensitive.
The more I think about it, the more I realize we need to get rid of all taxes and coercive regulation but keep the government and the courts in order to solve these sort of disputes.
No you don’t.
In that case, assume YOU were the government and tell us: how would YOU solve the dispute?
I tell you what I would do:
-
ask my neighbor politely to stop the noise
-
threaten retaliation
First of all, this hypothetical scenario is toooooooo hypothetical. It is presented in a vacuum. I do not believe that is wise. There are too many other social relationships that are omitted or held ceteris paribus for it to be useful. Neighbors usually scratch eachother’s backs.
For example, my neighbors and I share tools: lawnmowers, shovels, rakes, snowblowers, hedge-trimmers, etc. etc. When one person is out mowing the lawn, he usually does the other neighbor’s lawns and vice versa. We share all these things because it is more convenient that way. We each watch eachother’s property. If there is anything suspicious going on, we alert eachother or we intervene. My neighbor watches our kids and we watch their pets. So on and so forth.
Why would any of us piss off eachother with noise pollution? That would be pretty stupid.
A person who regularly uses property without transforming it obtains an easement to its use. It is a form of homesteading that doesn’t quite give the homesteader the right to exclude others from it’s use - but it does give them the right to continue using it in the manner in which they had previously been using it.
When you obtain ownership of a quiet home, the link established that makes you its proprietor includes the right to quiet enjoyment. So if your neighbor starts playing Cannibal Corpse through a loudspeaker all night long, that right - your easement to quiet enjoyment - is being violated. Your neighbor either must pay you for the right to be noisy, or must stop.
If the neighbor was there first, his right to his property includes an easement to raucous enjoyment by first appropriation. However - there is certainly a limit to that easement. A loudspeaker that deliberately broadcasts the sound into property that is not his cannot be valid. But if you hear Cannibal Corpse coming out of his open window on your first day there, it is up to you to buy soundproofing material.
First appropriation is everything. Depending on who gets there first, either you have a right not to be disturbed in the quiet use of your property, or he has the right not to be disturbed in the loud use of his. Naturally, since your quiet use cannot disturb anybody else whereas his use will, greater weight must be placed upon yours. But that doesn’t negate his rights entirely.
The question of how much or how far is an issue best decided through review. A libertarian shouldn’t try to legislate preemptive law. Let the application of the principle of the law be refined through its use.