Personal Rights
Shut it down! The rubber-neckers can come, listen, then go home to the quiet. The next door neighbor doesn’t have that luxury. Of course the neighbor could set up the amp, the speakers on the roof, and set a little Van Halen in motion from 6 till 10! He has the right to entertain also.
Can you say sling-shot? If I lived next door to some bullshit like that, it wouldn’t be around for long! I’ve been known to sneak to the neighbors’ and unscrew (in some cases totally remove) the light bulb from a flood light that has been ill-angled to totally illuminate my entire front yard. I look at it this way...if said neighbors have been asked nicely to readjust or remove the offending light (sound) and they refuse, what they are really saying is ‘Deal with it. It’s your problem not mine’ In that case, I accept the challenge and deal with it! I just cannot stand rude people who think they are the center of the universe and can do anything they want whether or not it totally ruins things for others. Bastards!
I have a potentially creative solution:
Set up an unlicensed low power broadcast station on an unused frequency in the FM or AM band to carry the music to listeners within a 200 foot range. (He’d have to ensure the signal was weak enough to broadcast ONLY within tha radius in order to stay within the permitted unlicensed status.) FCC link permitting this type of operation is here.
Then, put up a sign at the front of the display to inform people dropping by to view the display, “For music simulcast, tune your radio to <frequency>”.
Neighbors remain undisturbed, people who want to hear the musical accompanyment can.
In fact, that’s such a good idea, I’m writing a letter to Mr. Birkett proposing this as a solution and compromise, so when he goes before the judge, he has this to offer to both meet his needs, AND his neighbors desire for peace and quiet. Who knows, maybe this will satisfy everyone.
I like Len’s approach.
This is a problem of rights assignment. Let’s imagine that you don’t have a legally recognized right to a certain degree of quiet—or, for that matter, to be free of “light pollution,” as has been argued in certain Southwestern districts. That would imply that the neighbor has the right to emit light and sound to his heart’s content. But you could buy an easement from him.
Now turn it around. Let’s suppose you do have a recognized right to silence and a dark sky at night. Your neighbor, who wants to stun the world with his decorating brilliance, could buy permission from you.
Granted, this is just the two-person case, but it’s an example of Coase’s Theorem, which posits that rights will eventually migrate to the possession of those who want them most, whether by legal pre-assignment or by negotiation and purchase, as long as the transaction costs are not prohibitive.
It’s a fascinating study. Ron Coase won the Nobel in Economics for it.
Posted by Francis W. Porretto
12/27/2004 at 04:16 PM
12/27/2004 at 12:59 PM
