![Sample our Communication Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, 2013 & 2014 volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5927/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Information-Science2.jpg"})
Abstract
While seemingly straightforward, the boundaries of ownership can be confusing. Take the front lawn, for instance. Some local ordinances prohibit such things as parking on one's front lawn or displaying celebratory storks, “For Sale” signs, or political displays out of concern for the neighbours. However, what happens when the front lawn is taken over by an unstoppable lava flow? On the Big Island of Hawai'i, countless front lawns are now vast expanses of hardened black lava. These lawns exist now under changed jurisdiction as legal spaces. No longer are these lava-ed lawns now simply purely private property as state authorities now control the area. On front lawns with or without lava, the notion of ownership is confused by two competing rights: the rights of those who inhabit the property versus the rights of those who view the property. Here, the context of rights expands traditional claims and lines of ownership according to the activity of spectaclizing. This paper will examine the tension of ownership and pursuant competing rights that challenge the construction of traditional boundaries and their enforcement within the framework of the semiotics of space. In this paper, the semiotics of space found in front lawns challenges the standard faculties of law to remedy conflicting rights.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Anne Wagner, Tim Lukes, Teena Gabrielson, and the reviewers at Social Semiotics for their insightful comments and suggestions.
Notes
1. United States of American and United States Postal Service v. Pittsburg, California. 1981. Nos 79-4368, 79-4611.
2. I had the pleasure of meeting Jack Thompson in February 2011 as he graciously accepted my invitation as a Guest Speaker for my Political Science Seminar on “Law and Identity”.