Answer

Dear XXXXXXXXX,

1.Owning real property does not mean that all rights are protected.

This did not seem to be a question - let me know if it is.

2.Provide two examples of where rights are limited in the ownership of land or property.

Zoning limits property rights and eminent domain of course.

3.What are some similarities and differences between the legal protections available for real and intellectual properties?

Both must be registered, land with state authorities and copyrights, trademarks, and patents with federal registrations. Property rights do not end in that they can be passed onto others via will, but intellectual property rights, such as patents, do have a life which can end. Property rights can be affected through both state and federal law, but intellectual property rights are mainly a factor of federal law.

4.How do servitudes and easements get put into place?

These are normally done when parcels are initially divided or when neighbors make contractual agreements.

5.How can servitudes and easements be protected?

They can be protected by registering them with the deed or recording them at the state recorders office. If an easement is personal in nature, a contract can be written between the parties.

6.Why are servitudes and easements important?

They often allow the use of a parcel of land that would otherwise not be accessible. They also allow property owners to divide their properties in ways that can provide them income or other benefits. They allow utilities and other public entities the right to care for public property, such as power lines.

B. Intellectual property is limited in time in order to encourage intellectual and industrial development and creativity. If intellectual property were permanent that may prevent others from using a previous invention or art to create a new invention or art.

C.

1.What is the major difference between business speech and political speech?

Political speech has full protection under the First Amendment, but business speech can be limited.

2.Closely regulated industries are not afforded all Fourth Amendment guarantees against unreasonable search and seizure. Is this fair, or is it necessary to protect the greater good?

Public policy requires industries which provide public services and whose failure to obey all laws may create physical or other dangers to the public to be overseen and supervised by government to assure the public safety. Because these regulated industries sometimes have near monopoly power in certain areas, such as utililties, it is only fair, and in line with public policy, that tey have such regulation.