The document discusses the implications of augmented reality (AR) on property law and First Amendment rights, highlighting ongoing legal debates and cases like Candy Lab AR v. Milwaukee. It addresses concerns regarding land rights, potential harm, and the responsibilities of AR platforms. The text also notes failed legislative attempts in various states to regulate these emerging issues.

1. © 2019 Warner Norcross + Judd LLP
These materials are for educational use only. This is not legal advice and does
not create an attorney-client relationship.
Owning Augmented Space
Brian D. Wassom
May 30, 2019

2. A Long-Simmering Debate
That’s About to Explode
2

6. 6

7. Snap Landmarkers
7
Minecraft Earth

8. The First Amendment Hurdle
8

10. “Air Rights” =
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98306480@N00/7456004200CC BY-NC 2.0

11. 11
Property Law
(The right to exclude)
Freedom of Speech
(The right to express)
Location-Based AR
• Email Inboxes
• Domain Names
• Websites
• Land
• Buildings
• Physical Objects
?
?
• Graffiti
• Protests

12. “It’s Not Really There”
12

13. 13

14. Candy Lab AR v. Milwaukee

15. Options for Property Owners
15

16. • In re Pokemon Go
• Plaintiffs: “new way of violating land
rights that we haven’t seen before”
• Court: “novel issue,” “open questions”
• Settlement: Self-regulatory framework
for other AR platforms?
• Other AR events:
• Foreseeable harm?
• Duty to warn?
• Nuisance to neighbors?
• Attractive nuisance to kids?
Trespass / Nuisance
16

17. • Trademark Infringement
• False Endorsement
• Unfair Competition
• False Advertising
The Lanham Act
17

18. Legislative Solutions
• False starts:
• Milwaukee
• Illinois
• New York
• Under what circumstances could a
narrowly crafted regulation/law survive?
18

19. The Layer Group
Neil Mandt, CEO / Co-Founder
19

20. 20