"It always comes down to 'who fixes it if it breaks'?"
While this might be an interesting personal test, I don't believe it a legal standard. It is the case that one may enter into a contract to possess a physical good with limitations on its use, right? Isn't the issue that, sans such a contract, the US legal systems applies a common set of rules surrounding ownership?
While this might be an interesting personal test, I don't believe it a legal standard. It is the case that one may enter into a contract to possess a physical good with limitations on its use, right? Isn't the issue that, sans such a contract, the US legal systems applies a common set of rules surrounding ownership?