Can I load a banner ad from McDonalds on a webpage from my phone if I'm in BK? I don't think legislation that might prevent that would be reasonable. Just because this is projected onto the real world doesn't make it different. They're both layers in digital space.

The only entity that has jurisdiction over that particular digital space is the app itself, so they get to make the rules.

Not the same thing if the ad space is tied to geographic coordinates and services by a few major ad providers. Geographic ad placement could be huge. Especially “this is cheaper on amazon” ads.

What if google used location services to detect I was in a burger king, and showed me sponsored ads on the top of my search page on my phone, and McDonalds happened to be the highest bidder. I don't think the trigger for the ads change things.

Burger King is already (kind of) advertising in McDonalds by offering $0.01 Whoppers if you order them from inside a McDonalds: http://fortune.com/2018/12/06/burger-king-is-offering-01-who...

This is the big question, and one Kelly glosses in this piece, perhaps even obfuscates by banging on the 1:1 mapping thing while ignoring that a 1:1 mapping implies consensus on the map.

I think this notion, one I identify as an issue of semiotics as much as a technical challenge, is a huge problem / business opportunity. I did a bit of a deep dive on the topic in '15 in this Medium post: https://medium.com/@doctorhandshake/the-map-and-the-territor... ... been meaning to post to HN and never to got it ... will have to do that now.

A little disappointed in KK because I sent him this article in '16, and, despite that he didn't respond, he did crib a number of my points for this piece, as well as the Borges allusion.

Perhaps it'll be like buying the top search results in Google Ads: the AR space will be for sale to anyone and McDonalds will have to buy ads in their own stores to prevent Burger King from doing the same.

Yes! Although that assumes a third party managing the digital space, which McDonalds might still have to allow.

This could be a relevant take for US: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ca4af3d4-867a...

In your specific example, McDonalds might have both copyright and trademark, or even the publicity claims - design of the restaurant, arches and the recognizable nature of the brand all are very unique. Placing BK logos over them would be valuable because it’s McDonalds.

What about the situation where I don't like my neighbor and I put an ugly virtual sculpture on their property? Nothing insulting or offensive, just something ugly.

Should the neighbor have any rights over their virtual AR property?

I personally don't see this becoming a problem. At least the way I have imagined AR being.

The way I hope to see it is that all the different features are apps that you can either enable or disable and then the AR platform (e.g. the OS on your headset) just mixes them all together. So for example there could be an app for placing sculptures anywhere and it becomes a matter of that apps policy. If you don't like an app that lets you place sculptures anywhere just don't install it and use the one that ties in with property register. And so on.

This would also reduce the BK Ads in MCDs example to what we have today. It's not illegal to show BK Ads on peoples phones while they are in MCDs.

I've wished we had this same concept of OS-provided base layer in other areas as well, where your app provides plugins that could be enabled in the core app. It came to my mind when Apple released their share extension method.

Maps: I use a few apps whose sole purpose is to provide location-based info (eg we have a govt app that gives fuel prices). This could just be a plugin layer that could be enabled in the Maps app. Property searches, your favourite fast food place, etc.

Camera: plugins could provide more effects or manual camera settings control UI, or indeed... AR overlays.

I'm pretty sure that eventually, one "winner" app will appear and grab almost all market share, similar to how Facebook has it for social media.

Not necessary.

I think what allows "winner" apps to exist in modern world is that you can really use only one app at the time. Especially true for Smartphones. The way I hope AR to develop is that all of the small components (the apps) get composited together OS level. So that "winner" platform would be the OS itself.

Albeit, I'm being extremely optimistic here.

I would like for a more decentralized scenario to win, but it seems to me that people tend to gravitate towards centralization. It happened so many times already that it would be surprising if it doesn't happen again.

> where I don't like my neighbor and I put an ugly virtual sculpture on their property

Or the situation where you (with or without attribution) cause a virtual sign saying 'idiot' to appear over their head when they are in a public place?

first of all, i'm not going to have ads in my fucking AR experience.

https://vimeo.com/166807261

So far it’s totally legal to advertise on direct searches for your competitor. As of a few years ago it wasn’t uncommon to spend five figures or more monthly just to protect your brand.

Looks like google has started regulating this just from a quick look. I’d expect winners in the AR space to follow a similar trajectory, coming up with rules for this when it becomes a problem.

Can you navigate to the Burger King website in a MacDonalds?

Should be the same thing, no?

May not be quite the same. Navigating to Burger King website in McDonalds requires the user to take an explicit action to do so, Always-on geo-located AR may not require user consent (unless it's designed that way which may defeat the purpose of Ads).