I have no legal basis for this but it seems apparent to me that there is a difference between data you generate vs data generated for you. For instance, in Microsoft Word if I type a book, I obviously own that data because I myself entered it into the system. However I don't believe I can claim ownership over passive data that was collected during my use of the system.

If I kill someone with a hammer, is that the hammer company's liability? If not, then creation of an object (once sold) does not warrant ownership of said product and accompanying data.

> There's no real justification for anyone having that right. The device manufacturer/website owner/etc does the work of creating the data, yet you think it's yours?

That's BS. The real justification for anyone having that right is that 1) the data is about them and 2) they own the machine that collected/created the data.

> The device manufacturer/website owner/etc does the work of creating the data, yet you think it's yours?

They did the work of creating a device for sale. After the sale, their rights to the device end and the data should be owned by the new owner.

Does this mean that when I crash my Tesla into someone, Tesla is liable for it? After all, they did all the work of creating the car...

No, it's my device that creates the data, so it is mine. Otherwise, does the typewriter manufacturer own the stories you type?

I agree that you should own the data that was created because of your interaction with the device, but I do not agree that the reason is that you own the device.

Here's an example: You go to the library (or a privately owned web cafe), and write your stories there. It doesn't matter that you don't own the device. It's still your data.

I don't think that analogy holds up. Maybe: does the typewriter manufacturer own meta data such as letter frequency, average work length, etc that their product calculates based on your usage?

No, of course not.

Once money exchanged hands, it's not their product, it's mine, as is _all_ of its output, including logs, etc.

Otherwise, I'd call it 'spyware'.

This already isn't the case in many instances where you don't actually "own" the thing, you just have a license to use it.

If I buy a machine that manufactures widgets I own the widgets. Why should it be different for machines that produce bits?