The very fact we have to argue such things proves how petty and patronizing people really are. Sometimes you just have to LET IT GO and know that people don't "intentionally" try to harm you or your property, up until you're screaming and whailing about both. Obviously I cannot control the way a tree in my yard grows. Once the tree grows in a way that does not benefit my neighbor, I first ask myself how much I LIKE my neighbor. What is going to entice me to comply to his "demands", (who is he to demand anything of me?) to cut down this tree for his solar panels? What's in it for me?
There's this fine line between individualism and capitalism. They're not one and the same. Capitalism a lot of times requires cooperation that an individual does not have to abide by. If he truly values his individuality and does not hang on to common excuses like "it's for stability", "I'm being selfish", "do unto others", or some other crap. The point is, I was minding my own buisness, the tree grew in a way he did not like, what is he going to do to make it worth my while to cut off the branches or whole dang tree? Is he going to pay me? Does his solar panels effectively make everybody in the neighborhood's electricity free? THAT is the better question. That's why I get pissed off at forums that expect me to adhere to "rules" that they can't even articulate. They don't know what "the rules" are, they make them up as they go along. Got banned one time for reporting a thread. Yes, that's right. How DARE I try to adhere to the rules they put inplace? So you see, you can't win. And you shouldn't try too. The man is lucky I don't purposely act like I'm going to cut down the tree, then cut the tree in a direction where it falls RIGHT ON HIS SOLAR PANELS. Now he doesn't have his solar panels, and I just laugh and moonwalk back into my house. Because where is the trust? Where is the motivation? That should be what decides the next course of action. Not whether or not I'm "respecting" his invisible rights that he himself cannot fathom. I refuse to be bound to subjectivity . If we have to live in a world of rules and boundaries, then they should be as clear, and objective as possible, so there is NO ROOM for varying levels of punishment, there's no room for inequality, egalitarianism is not a crime. I believe that is something lost to the modern movement of individualsm. Which to be fair, not all people ascribe too. Libertarianism isn't Anarcho-Capitalism isn't Mutualism isn't etc. But my point is if they hold the individual up that highly, they have to think like an individual. An individual doesn't worry about how somebody else is fairing, but how HE is fairing. And while there has to be some level of compassion, and curteousy, or else it just becomes nihilism, and nobody benefits from that. It doesn't take nearly as much as you'd might think.
if the tree was there before the neightbor, than the tree takes precidence over the panels. I'd even argure future growth of tree is covered. I agree too on mutual cooperation. Even monetary incentives.
Would the same apply to using the flow of a river to power your home? If someone builds a dam upstream and dries up the river or slows it down enough so to fail to power your home, is that a property rights violation?