REINSERTING GAS & ESCAPING ANIMALS CASES : Argument By Analogy

1. REINSERTING GAS & ESCAPING ANIMALS CASES : Argument By Analogy • DQ2.33: Arguments from Factual Similarities & Differences (OXYGEN) • DQ2.34: Arguments re Usefulness of Legal Rules/Factors (RADIUM) • Arguments re Comparisons to Alternatives (Pros & Cons) • DQ2.35: Oklahoma Statute (OXYGEN) • DQ2.36; Airspace Solution (RADIUM) • DQ2.37: Overall (ALL)

2. ELEMENTS D1 & D2 POWER POINT SLIDES Class #32 Friday, November 17, 2017

3. Music to Accompany 2014 XQ1C (ZAC the ICE PLANET):York, Planet Chill 2014-01 Sun 11/19: GWA#3 Due @ 7 pm Mon 11/20: Last Elements Class/DF • Both Sections Together 7:55-9:20 • Last DF Session 4:30-5:20 Sat 11/25-Thu 11/30: Pre-Exam Office Hours Every Day; See Course Page for Times Tue 11/28: Review Session No Attendance Taken; Strongly Recommended 7:55-9:55 a.m.

4. ELEMENTS 17DEXAM QUESTION 2 MARATHON THEY’RE ALL THE SAME so STAY ON TASK THEY’RE ALL DIFFERENT so PUSH YOURSELF

5. Group Written Assignment #3Due Sun. Nov. 19 @ 7 pm Coordinators Remember: • Get Pseudonyms from Teammates or Tina (by End of Today) • Double-Check Formatting & Substantive Instructions Before Finalizing LAST CHANCE 4 QUESTIONS

6. REINSERTING GAS & ESCAPING ANIMALS CASES : Argument By Analogy DQ2.33 (OXYGEN): Factual Comparisons Between Escaping Animals Situations & “Escaping” Gas Situations Arguments from Factual Similaritiesre Usefulness of Escaping Animals Cases

7. REINSERTING GAS & ESCAPING ANIMALS CASES : Argument By Analogy DQ2.33 (Oxygen): Factual Comparisons • Relevant Factual SimilaritiesInclude: • In both, property moving from complete control to place where ownership is less certain. • White leak like escaping animal b/c escaping confinement w/o OO’s intent despite labor to control • Valuable property/industry • Both can hold identifying mark (although marking of gas probably only discernable to expert ) • Escaping ACs: Give OO fewer rights than other lost property; Use multi-factor test to decide betw OO & F. Similarities Make Approach or Factors OK here?

8. REINSERTING GAS & ESCAPING ANIMALS CASES : Argument By Analogy DQ2.33 (Oxygen): Factual Comparisons Between Escaping Animals Situations & “Escaping” Gas Situations Arguments from Factual Differences re Usefulness of Escaping Animals Cases

9. REINSERTING GAS & ESCAPING ANIMALS CASES : Argument By Analogy DQ2.33 (Oxygen): Factual Comparisons Relevant Factual Differences Include: • Natural Gas Lasts Much Longer Than Animal or Whale Carcass • Natural Gas Generally More Valuable Than Animal or even Whale Carcass • Reinsertion is Deliberate & Socially Valuable; Escape is Not • Reinsertion Leaves OO with Much More Control than Typical Animal Escape b/c Pool is Limited Area • Hard for Non-Expert to Make or Recognize Marks Escaping ACs: Give OO fewer rights than other lost property; Use multi-factor test to decide betw OO & F. Differences Make Approach/Factors problematic here?

10. Argument By AnalogyOil & Gas: Escape DQ2.34 (Radium): Usefulness of Doctrine (Legal Rules or Factors) from Escaping Animals Cases for “Escaping” Gas Situations (Hammonds, White, or Both) & Significance for Overall Usefulness of ACs Factors from Mullett & Blackstone: ABANDONMENT (Easy to Use) ANIMUS REVERTENDI? How Use? Good Idea? RETURN TO NL? How Use? Good Idea?

11. Argument By AnalogyOil & Gas: Escape DQ2.34 (Radium): Usefulness of Doctrine (Legal Rules or Factors) from Escaping Animals Cases for “Escaping” Gas Situations (Hammonds, White, or Both) & Significance for Overall Usefulness of ACs Factors from Other Cases: PROTECTING LABOR/INDUSTRY (Easy to Use for OO) TIME/DISTANCE How Use? Good Idea? MARKING/FINDER’s KNOWLEDGE (Leave for You)

12. Argument By AnalogyOil & Gas: Escape Possible Alternatives to ACs (DQ2.35-2.37) Thinking About Pros & Cons Might Consider: • Importance of Reinsertion & Cheap Fuel • Relative Importance of Landowners’ Interests • Ease of Administration • Public Reaction

13. Argument By AnalogyOil & Gas: Escape Oklahoma Statute (p.102: fn2) (Summary) • Reinserted gas remains property of Gas Co. (G) and other owners (Os) of pool cannot take reinserted gas or bring trespass action , BUT G doesn’t have any rights to gas in portions of the pool that it has not paid to use. • If G doesn’t buy rights from Os, doesn’t own gas in those parts of pool. • Means Os can extract, but not bring trespass action. • Might mean Gs will take risk that small Os can’t afford to extract and not pay them for rights. OXYGEN DQ2.35: Pros & Cons v. Escaping ACs

14. Argument By AnalogyOil & Gas: Escape Possible Alternatives to ACs Oklahoma Statute (p.102 fn2) PROS & CONS: Include • Injecting Gas Cos. have more control than in Hammonds; keep property rights so long as they pay for space; can choose to risk not paying small surface owners. • Owners of large surface plots likely to be paid for use of space. • Easier to Use than Full ACs Analysis • Higher costs of storage than Airspace Solution (both costs of purchasing space & admin. costs of negotiation or EmDom) • Smaller surface owners might get nothing.

15. Argument By AnalogyOil & Gas: Escape Possible Alternatives to ACs: Airspace Solution Possible State Regulation: • Reinserted gas stays property of Gas Co.(G) • BUT Surface Owners have no right to trespass action even if Gs haven't leased/bought space • Like rule about airspace over surface: above certain height, no rights. Here, below certain depth, Surface Owner has no rights (once gas extracted). RADIUM DQ2.36: Pros & Cons v. Escaping ACs

16. Argument By AnalogyOil & Gas: Escape Possible Alternatives to ACs DQ2.36 (RADIUM): Airspace Solution PROS & CONS: Include • Injecting Gas Cos. have complete control of space. • Lower costs of storage than Oklahoma or White. • Easier to Use than Full ACs Analysis • Owners of surface plots likely get nothing. • May result in Takings Litigation • May Result in Negative Political response

17. Argument By AnalogyOil & Gas: Escape Possible Alternatives to ACs DQ2.37 (ALL): Best Solution? (Left forYou) • White Rule: Reinserted Gas = Property of Gas Co. • Hammonds Rule: Reinserted Gas = Unowned (Simplified ACs) • More Complex ACs (Consider marking, control, etc.) • DQ 2.35 Oklahoma Statute (White footnote 2) • DQ 2.36 “Airspace Solution to Hammonds problem.” • Other??

18. REINSERTING GAS & ESCAPING ANIMALS CASES : Argument By Analogy • DQ2.33: Arguments from Factual Similarities & Differences (OXYGEN) • DQ2.34: Arguments re Usefulness of Legal Rules/Factors (RADIUM) • Arguments re Comparisons to Alternatives (Pros & Cons) • DQ2.35: Oklahoma Statute (OXYGEN) • DQ2.36; Airspace Solution (RADIUM) • DQ2.37: Overall (ALL) QUESTIONS?

19. 2012 EXAM Q2 (HUMAN GESTURES & USEFULNESS OF ESCAPING ACs)with KRYPTON & URANIUM

20. Argument By Analogy2012 Exam Question 2: Generally Usefulness of Escaping Animals Cases for Resolving Disputes re Human Gestures SIPI (Strongly Identified with Particular Individuals) Assume Property RtsOnly Available for Gestures Strongly Associated with Particular (Famous) Individuals AND Not Widely Used Otherwise. Assume No Binding I.P. Law or Custom We’ll Skip 1st Approach: Fact Comparisons

21. Argument By Analogy2012 XQ2: 2d Approach Resolving Disputes re Human Gestures SIPI Usefulness of Particular Escape Factors & Significance for Overall Usefulness of ACs • Marking/FK: Cons: Uranium Pros: Krypton • Labor/Invstmt: Cons: Uranium Pros: Krypton • Others Useful? Least: Uranium Most: Krypton

22. Argument By Analogy2012 XQ2: 3d Approach Resolving Disputes re Human Gestures SIPI Strengths/Weaknesses of Alternatives v. ACs • Alternative #1: OO (Mostly) Wins: If Strongly Associated w Particular Indiv and Not Commonly Used Before OO Did So., OO. Can Control All Commercial Use While Alive. • KRYPTON: Pros & Cons (v. Escaping ACs)

23. Argument By Analogy2012 XQ2: 3d Approach Resolving Disputes re Human Gestures SIPI Strengths/Weaknesses of Alternatives v. ACs • Alternative #2: F Wins: No Property Rights in Gestures at All. • URANIUM: Pros & Cons (v. Escaping ACs)

24. Argument By Analogy2012 Exam Question 2: Generally Usefulness of Escaping Animals Cases for Resolving Disputes re Human Gestures SIPI (Strongly Identified with Particular Individuals) QUESTIONS? Good-Bye to Uramium

25. 2014 EXAM Q2 (VIRTUAL PLANETS & USEFULNESS OF 1st POSSESSION ACs)with OXYGEN & RADIUM

26. Argument By Analogy2014 XQ2: 1st Approach (RADIUM) To what extent, if at all, do each of these differences make 1stPoss ACs difficult or inappropriate to use (and why)? 1) Many simultaneous “hunters” in Game 2) Physical/skilled labor v. intellectual labor 3)Capture: Hunters get control of entire body of animal at once v. “hunters” spread over surface of planet over time 4) Real world v.Virtual world 5) Hunter's purposes/goals different 6) Existence of identifiable program/programmers for Game

27. Argument By Analogy2014 XQ2: 2d/3dApproach (LEFT FOR YOU) Game programmers want a rule that allows colonists to become planet owners with less than 100% control (but don’t want voting options). 3 Possible ACs Tests: (a) Shaw test: Bring into Power & Control/Maintain Control (b) Pierson/LiesnerMortal wounding plus continued pursuit. (c) Mash-Up: “Substantially depriving the [planet] of its natural liberty” plus “reasonable precautions to prevent escape Other Alternatives for <100% Rule? Pros & Cons of 3 Tests and/or Alt?