Abstract
This Article discusses the impacts of the introduction of a data ownership scheme on access to information. It does so with reference to the distinction between data, defined as some representation of information by a specific medium (the syntactic level), and the information itself (the semantic level). With respect to data, it then looks at the difference between standard property rights and intellectual property (IP) rights, similarly assessing impacts on access to information. Private control at the semantic level is bad policy as it effects particularly serious limitations, relative to private control at the syntactic level, on the availability of information in society. IP-type rights similarly effect more serious limitations on the availability of information in society than do standard property rights over data. Focusing on the syntactic-semantic divide to discuss the data ownership case clarifies a few things. First, although there are reasons to be more solicitous of the case for data ownership for data subjects than the case for data ownership for others, there must be an acknowledgment of the fact that the former case often requires data ownership over the information itself. The two premier rationales for granting data ownership to data subjects are that such rights would enable data subjects to protect their privacy, and that it would enable them to claim a share in the benefits of the data economy. This Article points out that any effective attainment of these rationales for data ownership for data subjects requires that data subjects be empowered to exclude others from information even before its collection—that is, even before its representation in syntactic form. This is exclusion power over semantic information. Second, the data ownership for data subjects case is less objectionable in the context of control at the syntactic level as such control is less likely to lead to indirect semantic-level control. By contrast, control at the syntactic level by data collectors creates the problem of indirect semantic control. There is, therefore, no meaningful case for data ownership for data collectors, even at the syntactic level. But the reduced likelihood of indirect semantic-level control in the context of data subjects means that there are sometimes prospects for propertarian rights for data subjects over data being structured to avoid semantic control. What emerges from this understanding is a pattern in which policy supports some syntactic bases for a propertarian remedy for data subjects, but otherwise counsels against data ownership. Finally, those bases for a propertarian remedy over data for data subjects are limited to discrete areas where data ownership for data subjects can be deployed with little, or no, control being exerted at the semantic level, and therefore at little to no cost in public access to information. This is likely to be especially true in the context of standard property as semantic-level control by data subjects is more likely to be a non-issue in this case.
Recommended Citation
Zvikomborero Chadambuka, Owning Data: Semantic Control as Inaccess to Information, 20 FIU L. Rev. 947 (2026), https://doi.org/10.25148/lawrev.20.3.9.
Included in
Computer Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Law and Society Commons, Privacy Law Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons
