Mike Lorrey writes of the spectrum allocation issue:
>Well, the original point of debate regresses back to the original land
I think that the argument errs on two counts. First, it presumes that
statists have rights to the property they claim, usually by merit of having
stuck a flag in some corner of a continent or watershed. Contrary to that, I
would argue that property rights in land follow from possession and
improvement--usually the province of native peoples or of incoming settlers.
grants.
. . . Since electromagnetic spectra were not seen as a form of property
>(or even to exist) until after many of these grants were made,
>it follows that all grants but those which were blanket grants of
>sovereignty . . . retained such rights to the sovereign power, i.e. the
>federal or state government.
Tom
T.0. Morrow
t0morrow@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/t0morrow/T0Mpage.HTML