Hacker News Reader

Comment by TylerE | Hacker News Reader

Isn't there a free speech issue here? Can't they put up signs proclaiming whatever they want on their own property?. Yes, I am aware that there are some specific public-safety oriented exceptions, like impersonating police, but I don't see that here. Scumbag? Yes, but it absolutely should not be illegal.

View on HN

This argument makes no sense. Why not paint the curb in front of your house red or yellow to discourage parking, then? Why not pop a few "free speech" stop signs on the road as part of a private traffic-calming initiative? Why not leave it up to the informed motorist to figure out whether the curb is painted red for a safety reason or merely because the homeowner is a jackass?

Trying to enforce one's will over public property and public behavior with misleading, official-looking signs is scarcely any better than impersonating a police officer for the same effect--it's just a matter of degree.

Well, while I agree with the spirit of what your saying, 100%, I do disagree with his argument not making sense.

Everything you're suggesting would be illegal, because the person would be defacing public property. There's a clear line between repainting a city owned curb or a posting a sign on a city owned streetside.

It's not -exactly- the same as painting a curb on your own property, or putting a sign on your own lawn.

Again. I agree that these Malibu owners are being crappy, but there's a difference.

The whole problem is finding out exactly where the property line is. There is a whole army of professionals that do that, full time -- surveyors. And there are databases of lots and zones that local governments maintain (some even behind pay walls). So finding out where exactly "private" stops and "public" begins is not that simple.

The issue might not be that big in areas where nobody cares about land that much, but in NY, LA, or other big city, where the cost of land is so high, every inch counts.

So you paint the curb red and install a fake fire hydrant. Is the curb yours or not? I don't know. Can you "impersonate" a fire hydrant to stop others from parking in front of your house? Not sure. It seems like it would be illegal. Kind of like putting a fake "highway entrance" green sign on the side of your house. It is your property but if it start directing traffic into your neighbor's pool you might just get fined or sued. At least a law will quickly be created to deal with the issue.

Point taken, the city usually owns the curb, I think... but has a painted curb been defaced, or merely weatherproofed in a colorful, free-expression sort of way? On the other hand, stop signs and the like tend to be stuck into private property.

There's definitely some funny business when it comes to signs and sidewalks; e.g., the landowner owns the sidewalk, but is required to keep it clear and level, not prohibit the public walking on it, not turn it into a flowerbed, etc.

Fraud is typically not protected by free speech rights. For example, if you put up a fraudulent "No Parking" sign on your property so that people wouldn't park on the curb next to your house, that would be illegal even if it were on your property.

Isn't this very close to impersonating police? Impersonating the government?

Google says yes, in certain cases: "http://blog.lawinfo.com/2011/03/23/impersonating-a-governmen...

That's talking about impersonating a government _employee_.

Public beaches and their required-to-be-public access points presumably aren't private property, and I'd bet that those 'no parking' signs are on public property as well, given that the parking spaces themselves are apparently public.

The no parking sign is clearly in the middle of a patch of bushes. Willing to be bet they figured out exactly what the city easement is and positioned accordingly.

I think you may be attributing too much effort in finding and toeing the legal boundaries, but yeah, you definitely have a point about the bushes :)

The law is not just what is written, is it what is commonly practiced as well. So says the great and terrible philosopher Carl Schmitt, and he makes sense.

These fake signs try to change common practice; they are subverting the law and are quite successful at it. They are black hat hackers, in a way.

I cannot see why you would be supporting this scumbaggery.

I don't support it, per say, but it's a bit like how you don't support free speech for all unless you support free speech for nero-nazis and other groups you find personally offensive.

Functional speech can be regulated. And yes, it should be illegal to put up signs purporting to be official.

I don't know... Some of those signs look like they are government signs, and that could be a public safety issue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com