I read recently (on Wired) about a patent that Google has been granted. They want to update advertisements that appear on Google Street View. It's one of those, 'oh yeah, that's pretty smart' moments when Google aptly demonstrate why they're winning.
If Google starts collecting cash on digital representations of physical billboards, then more questions than you can shake a stick at arise. Such as, if Clear Channel pay for an adverting hoarding to be erected (IRL) and Google photographs it then who owns what percentage of that advertising space. Sure Google are paying for hosting the image but they'd have nothing to charge for had Clear Channel not put up the hoarding in the first place. Clearly these questions have been answered somewhere already but they're still nice to ponder on.
Also other good questions arise, like who owns the digital representation of my house? Or can I advertise on my house or attach hanging data to the windows like hanging baskets of code...
These are very intriguing questions.
How is the digital world different from the real world in economic terms? As these two arenas become increasingly linked together we're going to have to figure this out. Do I have less rights? What is the law differentiation about occupied land in a digital space compared to a physical space?
I like problems like this. I think they challenge the way we live and it's about time we thought about our personal relationship to the digitised world a bit more and it's place amongst the buildings and the grass.
